Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scouting/Archive 2007

Lead coordinator

I am sure that all participants in the Project are delighted that Rlevse has returned to WP and the Project. When he left he resigned as lead coordinator. He has asked me, as coordinator for Project mediation to seek consensus whether the Project wants to hold an election, where I understand Rlevse would stand, or just to ask him back as coordinator. I therefore ask you to give your views below. Please vote for Hold an election or Ask him back, although of course other opinions, comments etc are welcome. I will start the process. --Bduke 23:20, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I should have added that I will close this discussion in a week or sooner if an overwhelming consensus develops. --Bduke 00:32, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

• Ask him back. I sense that the Project is more than delighted with the leadership that Rlevse has given over the last year and simply wants him to continue with the minimum of fuss. --Bduke 23:20, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
• Return to duty --JohnDBuell 23:32, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
• Welcome back, your seat's still warm Chris 02:21, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
• Ask him back I feel he performed very well and would continue to do so.Sumoeagle179 02:35, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
• Ask him back he's done well in the past, and I know he will continue to do well in the future. Darthgriz⁹⁸ 02:39, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
• Ask him back, but it is his choice, not his duty.--Egel _Reaction? 15:54, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
• Ask him back; he needed a break and I don't want to do it :-) --Gadget850 ( Ed) 16:24, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
• He wasn't gone: going on a wikibreak, even if you make a little bit more fuss about it, doesn't change any informal status the lead coordinator functionary has. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 15:38, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

This seems a pretty solid consensus with all comments agreeing and no new contributions for over a day. I am therefore closing this discussion. Rlevse, put your coodinator's hat back on and get to work! Actually you seem to have been working very hard on the Project since your return. Well done, we look forward to more excellent leadership for a long time to come.

Having said that, I suggest we do discuss whether there should be a term for the appointment of the coordinator, say one year, or whether we just leave it informal. I think I am an appropriate person to raise this question, since, for reasons I will not discuss here, I have absolutely no intention of ever being coordinator of this project. Let us discuss this broadly below, and see whether a consensus develops. --Bduke 22:30, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

• The advantage of a term with, say, a call for interest early in December and then a debate or vote, might allow a smooth transition with one coordinator mentoring the next for a short time. The alternative might be the total departure of one coordinator in a stressed out condition. I therefore support a year's term. --Bduke 22:30, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Thanks for everyone's support. I support a one year term with no limit on being reelected. Let's do it every Dec and close in early Jan, like we just did. Bduke is in charge of overseeing it. This will give folks a chance to openly voice concerns, if any exist. MILHIST does it this way and has had the same lead coord for some years but they still hold the election.Rlevse 22:45, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
• I am taking it that people agree with Rlevse, so let us do it as he suggests. --Bduke 23:37, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Happy New Year

Hey, all, the very best wishes for 2007!!! Wim van Dorst (Talk) 15:38, 1 January 2007 (UTC).

You too, brother, and to all sisters and brothers in Scouting! Chris 07:23, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

al-Mahdi Scouts

Fox News on January 1, 2007 had a report on the al-Mahdi Scouts, a youth wing of the Hezbollah in southern Lebanon. The really interesting thing is, outwardly, they look very much like traditional Scouts, with the normal uniforms (light and medium blue, white, yellow and purple for different groups) and badges and all. The flags being flown from cars and along the roadside showed the emblem, again a traditional fleur-de-lis, whose petals are left-to-right green/white/red, and in the top center of which is a hand with an out-turned palm, possibly the Hand of Fatima, and supported on left and right by single scimitars. Can anyone support/document this? In itself it would be a most interesting article. Chris 07:23, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

It's clear that this organization exists but it's status in Scouting is unknow: There are no reliable sources on the members of the Fédération du Scoutisme Libanais - according to some sources this militant anti-zionist organization is a member of the federation and of WOSM. We had hot discussions on this topic in some German Scouting boards resulting in questioning WOSM about this organization. This was in last August, but there is no final answer yet. Quote: We well received your message and we forwarded it to the Lebanese federation through Georges Ghorayeb, also member of the World Scout Committee (Cc to this message). Please understand that our brother scouts are currently busy with relief work. I hope we will be able to give you the accurate information very soon.

Some links:

• The official homepage at http://www.almahdiscouts.org is not available.
• Press:
  • Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center at the Center for Special Studies, Israel - main source for all reports and blogs
  • Time magazin: Photo Essay: Inside Hizballah
• Board Discussions:
  • DPSG Bundesforum: Al Mahdi Pfadfinder
  • The far longer and deeper discussion on http://www.pfadfindertreffpunkt.de was removed because of to many personal attacs

Hope this helps. --jergen 09:47, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Jergen! I am pretty sure, based on the news report, that this is more a political organization which has taken on the names/symbols... of Scouting, but in truth is probably more of a Political or military youth organisation. I'll get to work on it as I get time. Chris 10:35, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

If someone knows Libanees: al-Mahdi Scouts in the Internet Archive --Egel _Reaction? 10:53, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Sites of Jamborees

Is it appropriate to put articles on sites of Jamborees, such as Arrowe Park, in the Project with the big template on the talk page, when the Scouting content is one sentence in quite a large article. Several have just been added. I doubt it is appropriate. If it is, Sutton Park should be so tagged. --Bduke 22:08, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

• Well, Arrowe Park is listed as Low Importance, as it is indeed merely touching on the subject of Scouting. And I don't think that is it so very wrong. The Arrowe Park is just a stub anyhow: perhaps when it is enlarge to FA quality, the Scouting part will be more? No big deal, I'd say, with appropriate importance (Low). Wim van Dorst (Talk) 22:28, 2 January 2007 (UTC).
  • I almost took the tags off, but went with leaving them, but Low imp. I agree with Wim. Let's make this a defacto rule, or an official one if you guys want.Rlevse 22:46, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
    • It already is a rule: (from the Importance Assessment table): Subject is not particularly notable or significant even within the field of Scouting, and may have been included primarily to achieve comprehensive coverage of another topic (such as a subcamp of a Scout reservation). Just to avoid extra rules and regulation (read: work for our well-rest (albeit already again nearly overworked ;-) lead coord. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 23:41, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

That does cover it in my opinion, it just doesn't explicitly say "cities where jambos were held"-;) Rlevse 03:03, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

• It did last time I looked :-]. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 22:47, 10 January 2007 (UTC).

• That's because you looked right after you edited it-;) Rlevse 01:10, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:AlbaniaScouts.jpg

The image deletionists are at it again, will someone please help me save this graphic? Chris 02:04, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Listed this on the "delete" section of the project page. Rlevse 03:14, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

• Sorry, Chris, but this is really a copyright infringement, as well as a privacy violation. But easily solved, I guess: just ask the Spanish the webmaster of the site where you grabbed it from whether he would can give it into the public domain. The 'Contact Us' is on the home page of their website. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 10:03, 5 January 2007 (UTC).
  • Yep ... the new(er) interpretation of the policy is that if the person is living or the building is standing, it's replaceable. I really wish that old photos had been grandfathered in (kinda like was done with images missing rationales or uploaded under a non-commercial license) so that they could be replaced gradually ... but that didn't happen. I don't think the discussion on the talk page is really going to matter - when an admin reviews it in a week, it's gone. Please see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions on seeking permission. Specifically, if they are willing to release the image under the GFDL or into the public domain, that permission needs to be emailed to "permissions-en AT wikimedia DOT org". --BigDT 10:20, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't understand the privacy bit, but I have written to the site master, turns out I know three of the five contacts listed. Thanks for the heads-up. Chris 10:59, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

That policy makes no sense at all. If there's only one known copy of a person/building, then it is not replaceable. What are people supposed to do, like in this case is to fly to Albania to get their own. This is expecting too much of people and another case of extremists getting control of wiki.Rlevse 13:12, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

It may not be easily replaceable. But it is potentially replaceable. I wouldn't be overly inclined to fly to Albania ... but there is an Albanian Wikipedia where someone who speaks the language could make the request. [1]. Category:Wikipedians in Albania gives five en Wikipedians who self-identify as being from Albania. One of them - User:ProgressiveΛeternus is active here and on the Albanian Wikipedia. If contacting the owner of this image falls through, I would suggest contacting User:ProgressiveΛeternus to ask for help. --BigDT 15:16, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip, 5 isn't much to work with, especially for an area like Scouting, but maybe one will come through.Rlevse 15:35, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

See also Category:User sq - that gives 41 users who speak Albanian and Category:User sq-N gives 24 who speak it as a native language. That may give a few more to work with. --BigDT 16:24, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikimedia Commons

Hey everyone - Randy asked me to mention Wikimedia Commons here. Commons is another Wikimedia project whose mission is to store free (no fair use) images that may be used on any project. Only images that are unquestionably free can be uploaded there. Any image on Commons "automagically" comes through to Wikipedia. For example, if you take a look at Image:Virginia Tech War Memorial Chapel sunset.jpg, both the image and talk pages are redlinked. But anywhere that the image is used, it shows up and pulls the image from Commons.

There is a built-in security feature such that once an image is uploaded to Commons, you are prevented from uploading an image here with the same name. That means that once the project logo is deleted locally, nobody can vandalize every single Scouting page by uploading an unScoutlike picture.

Commons has articles like Commons:Virginia Tech or Commons:glasses that are essentially galleries of images that can be used for articles on a given topic. There is already a Commons:Scouting article. If you contribute an image to Commons, you can add it to that article and then it can be used by anyone on any WikiMedia project.

Many projects consider it a goal to enhance Commons coverage of images dealing with their topic. I think that would be a good Scouting goal as well. We could create articles for camping, or other Scouting topics.

Please keep in mind, as a general warning, that they are, out of necessity, more restrictive than enWiki. For example, even things that nobody on en Wiki would really mind - like a photo that prominently displays a copyrighted logo - should not be uploaded there to be on the safe side. (See Commons:Commons:derivative works for more than you ever wanted to know about this.) --BigDT 20:34, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I suggest we use WikiCommons as much as possible. Whether you agree or not, Wiki is increasingly moving towards free images. This option will give us an easy place to find free images (PD, CC, and GFDL) that can be used without question and on any wikipedia. BigDT is a Scouter and image tag expert, so I suggest we follow this suggestion here. His knowledge of Scouting and image tagging will help us navigate the often mystical world of image tags. He is listed as our image coordinator on this article's page and is ready to help us all. Many thanks to BigDT here! Rlevse 22:08, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

If anyone is interested in moving an image from here to Commons, please see Wikipedia:Moving images to the Commons. There is a great tool that you can use - http://tools.wikimedia.de/~magnus/commonshelper.php - that does 99.999% of the work for you. You just point it to the image that you want to move and it adds the text for the Commons description page. You need to create a Commons account first. Then open this tool, enter the name of the image that you want to move and then when it asks you to, save the Wikipedia version of the image to your hard drive. It will take you to the Commons upload page and it will already be fully decked out. Then, you come back to Wikipedia and tag the image with {{subst:ncd}} so that the Wikipedia copy of the image can be deleted (the Commons page will "show through"). If you have an image that is potentially useful, but isn't being used in an article right now, moving it to Commons is a great way of making sure that it doesn't get deleted as an orphaned image. Wikipedia isn't free webhosting and if an image is orphaned and we can't figure out at WP:IFD what it's supposed to be used for, it will be deleted. But if it is put on Commons (and preferably add it to an appropriate gallery or category), it's safe. --BigDT 22:41, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Then don't you have to add it to the Scouting article/gallery to get it to show there?Rlevse 23:16, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

If you upload an image to Commons, it will automatically be available for anyone on any Wikipedia to use ... if they know the filename or can find it when searching. But it makes it a lot easier to find if it's categorized or on an article. If you look at the very bottom right hand corner of en Wikipedia's Scouting article, there is a link to the Commons Scouting article. So anyone working on another language's Wikipedia can put a similar template on their Scouting article and everything is instantly readilly accessible to them. --BigDT 23:27, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

You missed my point, I meant don't you have to manually add the image to the Scouting gallery on Commons? Commons won't automatically know it's a Scouting image. Rlevse 23:32, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok ... yes ... the Commons:Scouting article is an article just like one on Wikipedia ... any image that you want there, you have to add to it. --BigDT 01:28, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Okay, dumb question-do Scouting logos count? We have over 300 (see Gallery of Scout and Guide national emblems) that would be nice to share between wikis. Chris 23:37, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

No ... only free images can be uploaded to Commons. Anything that is fair use can only be here. --BigDT 00:08, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Please note that commons has other restrictions as well. For instance, they frown upon candid photos of people becuase in some European jurisdictions it can be legall construed as an invasion of the person's privacy to post such a photo (this depends on a complicated set of circumstances). Furthermore, commons is very strict about copyrighted images as well as images that show copyrighted images. A close-up photo of a merit badge or merit badge book is not OK. A poised photo of a scount wearing a merit badge sash is OK. A candid shot of a scout is probably OK.

One more point, it is true that you have to manually add the image to the Scouting gallery, but there is also a Scouting category that works just like the categories here - just add the right text to the photo description when you upload it (or anytime after-wards).

All that being said, I totally agree and support putting pictures on commons. I put all my photos there if they fit the criteria. I also sometimes go looking for suitable photos on the web. Essentially all photos taken by the US govt are public domain, so they qualify. Some people on Flikr release their photos appropriately as well. If you need a photo for an article, searching flikr is a good step to take. Johntex\^talk 04:44, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Scout image naming

Okay, this may be a horribly bad idea, and unworkable, but I will throw it out to see what you think. Since we do have so many Scout images with so many names, which do not match each other, perhaps we should resave them under new names which specifically state what they are and where they're from? My idea is that they should use the Country code top-level domains, like is done at Flags of the World, like so:

A badge from the German Saint George association would be labeled like

Image:de.wosm.dpsg.1986 Image: de. (for Germany) wosm. (for supranational affiliation) dpsg. (acronym of organization) 1986 (something to describe it in the event there are several images for one organization)

while a badge from Japan may be labeled

Image:jp.wosm.saj.Scouts at camp and so on. Please no flames, just an idea. Chris 01:42, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

As a software engineer, I love that idea. Keep in mind, though, that there is no way to rename an image - they would have to be downloaded and re-uploaded. For the "free" images, this could be done as a part of migrating images to commons - move it to commons under the new name ... then delete the old image here. For the non-free ones ... I don't know ... flip a coin there. It's an interesting idea. Going forward, though, having a naming convention wouldn't be a horrible idea. --BigDT 02:48, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Nice, but it'd confuse the non-computer geeks.Rlevse 03:23, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, I did say, "as a software engineer". Of course, I think things like grep are straight forward, so it may be a good idea to ignore me. ;) --BigDT 01:27, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Chris, always good to provide fresh ideas, and for this one, I think you correctly estimated the horribleness and unworkability. ;-). Wim van Dorst (Talk) 22:13, 9 January 2007 (UTC).

article rename proposal

I propose that Scouting in breakaway and non-aligned organisations be renamed and moved to Breakaway and non-aligned Scouting organisations, it's just way less cumbersome in English. Didn't want to make this a voting matter for all of Wikipedia, we can figure it our ourselves. Chris 22:24, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Doesn't matter to me. I'll go with the majority vote. Let's allow this to run for 5-7 days.Rlevse 22:36, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

• support moving. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 22:38, 10 January 2007 (UTC).
• support - I agree it is a little smoother and more consistent with general naming practices on Wikipedia. Johntex\^talk 04:36, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Project logo - SVG version

Several days ago, I asked at Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Images to improve if someone would look at making an SVG version of the project logo. SVG graphics are completely scaleable. In other words, it doesn't matter at what resolution the image is displayed. If you display [[Image:Scout logo2.svg|20px]] or [[Image:Scout logo2.svg|1000px]], it will completely scale.

• 
  current project logo
• 
  SVG logo
• 
  Recoloured SVG logo

Consider the userbox and the portal logo:

This user is a member of WikiProject Scouting.

This user is a member of WikiProject Scouting.

{{portal|Scouting|Scoutsgreengoldnoscroll.png}} {{portal|Scouting|Scout logo2.svg}}
I think User:Time3000 did a great job with it ... if anyone would like to suggest some tweaks, please see Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Images to improve. Obviously, there are no policy issues here or any such thing - either or both versions of the logo can be used as desired - whatever is desired by everyone here. For a minor change (tweaking colors), I can probably do it myself. (SVG files can be edited by anyone in a text editor.) For anything major, we can ask at the graphics lab. --BigDT 17:07, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

• I'm not good at creating/editing graphics except simple stuff, but I like the SVG version. I'm giving Time3000 a wiki MB (black and white one). I'm putting into our portal, project, etc. Rlevse 17:40, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
• The scalability of the original PNG file wasn't bad, although it definitely gets grainy when scaled beyond +100% or so, downscaling is better. But a nice SVG is good too. Would it be possible to re-add the embroidery look of it? Now is looks rather flat, even when there's the colour gradient. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 22:36, 10 January 2007 (UTC).
  • I wish it were, but I don't think textures work in SVGs. --BigDT 23:32, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

This is one of the coolest collaborations our Project has produced-I was asked to create the original free non-specific logo, then Gadget Ed modified it, now this one, it just gets nicer each time. Next suggestion-can we plug it into the Commons to add a little color to our brother and sister German and French Scout WikiProjects? Chris 06:09, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

In addition, we have our own resident logo creation and cleanup genius in User:Zscout370, the work he's done on Belarusian and post-Soviet articles is vibrant and phenominal-I wonder if we can nominate folks for the Graphic Lab? Chris 06:20, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

ps-there are several images in the Gallery that could use some cleanup, so I came up with the half dozen in need of most help and asked Zach to look at them when he can. Chris 06:28, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

• I've already put the SVG and PNG versions in Commons.Rlevse 10:55, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Scouting Ireland

• the scouting ireland article seems to be lacking of much information. and in other articles i can find hardly anything about scouting ireland, there are no mention of promise etc. could this be added to the project or sumthin?Daniel625 19:34, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but we need someone familiar with Irish Scouting. Try User:Stevecull. Rlevse

Proposed Changes to {{user vigil-n}}

I have created a proposed change to the {{User vigil-n}} user box at User:Z4ns4tsu/Sandbox2. It removes the options to change the box's colors, image, and text and instead uses options and parser functions to allow you to add your Vigil name and it's translation. Examples are at User:Z4ns4tsu/Sandbox3 and on my user page. Please look them over and then let me know if anyone else is interested in this at all. If not, I'll just leave it in my sandbox and use it myself. If so, we can discuss putting that code on the template's page. z4ns4tsu\^talk 17:34, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

OK with me. They can be added to Scouting user templates cat when adopted.Rlevse 18:00, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

It looks like this will make the {{User:UBX/vigil}} and {{User vigil-n}} userboxes redundant. However, the coding is the same for the new vigil-n and the old vigil, so I would suggest that the new code be placed on vigil and a re-direct placed on vigil-n. Does that sound about right? z4ns4tsu\^talk 19:02, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Fine with me ... I was actually going to suggest that. When I originally made {{user vigil-n}}, I was a new user and didn't know about optional parameters. There's no real reason for two different ones. ;) --BigDT 19:06, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I've made the changes. I spot-checked about five users pages to make sure they didn't break, and it looks good to me. I guess the next step would be to get the users who are pointing to vigil-n over to vigil so that the other can be deleted, but I don't know how to do that or who to talk to about that (I think it can be botted?). z4ns4tsu\^talk 21:20, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

I have updated all transclusions and nominated the redirect for deletion at WP:RFD. --BigDT 18:51, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

What Scouting really is

Scouting is too often confused with an association or the outdoors. That is not Scouting, those things are just veils to cover what we really do. Scouting (Girl Guides, Girl Scouts, Boy Scouts, Ventuers, Explorers, etc) is really a program, system of beliefs, a way of living and thinking, all grounded in the same root, that we use to instill things like character, honor, and integrity. And for many of us, such as me, it's also an extended family. Let's stop worrying about how we're different and focus on how we're alike and what we're really about. (pasted from a thread at GSUSA talk) Rlevse 11:31, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Well said.Sumoeagle179 20:53, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Tin Tun

Would you please watch over this article? A biased newbie keeps editing out what I verified and documented. As a Scouting bio I don't want to see our pages violated. Chris 20:09, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Layout of wikiproject page

As Randy just reverted my alteration of the wikiproject page, I'd like to mention here that personally I find the page very cluttered. Finding the Table of Contents in the middle of section 2 doesn't help either. And I tried to find an obvious place for wikiproject announcements, but couldn't. Anyone else having an opinion on this? Wim van Dorst (Talk) 21:29, 13 January 2007 (UTC).

Forcing actionable items way down past the nav pane isn't the answer either. Rlevse 23:00, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

• Why not doing away with the TOC then, and improving the navigational pane to actually do navigation?? Wim van Dorst (Talk) 23:13, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
  • I'm all open to improvement, but we shouldn't test on the live project page. Feel free to use my sandbox to testing, that's what I did when I made the nav pane. See email too. Rlevse 23:20, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
    • WP:BB. Other answer via mail. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 00:36, 14 January 2007 (UTC).
    • likewise.Rlevse 00:39, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

invitations of great resources

Administrators and friends, I have sent invitations to join our project to two of the greatest Scouting resources on the net, http://www.troop97.net (maybe later) and http://n2zgu.50megs.com/ (no thanks). I must be doing it wrong. Would someone else take it upon themselves to invite the webmaster of http://pinetreeweb.com/ ? Thanks, Chris 03:37, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Pinetree web was asked before and said no, but anyone can try again. Rlevse 04:21, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Do we have something specific in mind we would like them to contribute? Also, have they made any specific objections as to why they don't want to help us out? Johntex\^talk 04:32, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

REQUEST FOR OPINIONS - Isn't BSA Exploring part of scouting?

In the article about collecting scout memorabila, a section includes links to related subjects. Law Enforcement Exploring[2] is an existing related Wikipedia article. Kintetsubuffalo believes it is not related to the subject of collecting scout emblems, and has repeatedly removed it. Since Law Enforcement Exploring is a formal part of BSA, and hundreds of unique emblems are used by the BSA LE explorer program, I believe it to be properly related and should be included for reference. Please provide opinions so that I may be guided.Patchbook 06:29, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

The stub even doesn't mention emblems - so why should it be included in this category. Please insert content first before addin the category. --jergen 10:56, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Patchbook posted this same notice on the memorabilia article Talk:Scouting memorabilia collecting talk page, please post comments there. I've copied Jergen's there. Rlevse 11:09, 18 January 2007 (UTC)...See my response to this there. Rlevse 13:04, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Good grief ... there are a kazillion different kinds of explorer posts. Nobody would consider a police badge to be a kind of Scouting memorabilia. Categories are used for linking loosely related articles ... there is already Category:Collecting there ... there's no reason to list every kind of collecting in the See Also. --BigDT 12:32, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

I was considering the link and additional article from the perspective of a Wikipedia user looking for information and not knowing anything about scouting, LE Exploring, or emblem collecting. Are you folks suggesting that BSA and LE Exploring, and the emblems worn in those programs are not a related subject? Please offer more discussion so I may understand better because I thought the "be bold" Wikipedia concept here was focused at providing a cross section of information. Thanks Patchbook 23:13, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

User:English Subtitle

This user is a sockpuppet, and has been unilaterally changing names of international Scout articles to proposed but unagreed upon English translations, despite the fact no agreement has been reached on said renames. This user has no other user history except doing this, and needs to be watched and reverted when possible. Chris 04:41, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I proposed the four article for renaming; this can't be done by me since User:English Subtitle vandalized all redirects. --jergen 10:49, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

• Just because you don't agree with someone, it doesn't make them a vandal. While I don't agree with or condone User:English Subtitle's methods - it did amuse me that suddenly jergen has agreed to mediation. --evrik ^(talk) 02:04, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Jergen has a point-the unagreed upon redirect is one thing, the intermediate edit preventing it from being reverted is dirty pool. If not vandalism, sabotage is a good word. Chris 08:49, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

• I was a cub scout as a kid. Really. English Subtitle 22:25, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Leaving snipes on users' talkpages is not at all Scoutlike. If something looks like a sockpuppet, acts like a sockpuppet... it is not out of bounds to say it is probably a sockpuppet. The truth is incontrovertible, malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. (Winston Churchill) Chris 05:29, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

New picture of Gilwell Park

GoogleEarth has a new scan of Gilwell Park, with superb resolution. You can now count the persons walking in each separate camp on the site. Excellent view, well worth a visit. Just click on the coordinates in Gilwell Park and choose the Google Earth link. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 21:34, 21 January 2007 (UTC).

Very cool.Rlevse 23:01, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Studio 2B makeover

Studio 2B is undergoing maintenance and a complete makeover including a history section and a new image. Feel free to pitch in or add your two cents on what you think needs done yet. Darthgriz⁹⁸ 15:41, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

You could list this on the project page for in-project Peer Review if you like.Rlevse 15:49, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Girl Scout levels (USA)

This article is undergoing a huge redo, please feel free to jump in. Darthgriz⁹⁸ 04:43, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Congrats, everyone!!!!!!

Congratulations for having the Scouting article becoming a FA!!!!!! Keep up the good work! —¡Randfan!^{Sign here?} 01:44, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

BSA advancement cleanup

Previously on Wikipedia. Back in March of 2006, we had a consensus to merge the Cub Scouting and the Boy Scouting advancement articles as I have proposed below. These merges were made and the links and redirects fixed. In June 2006, User:Cool Cat unilaterally reverted all of these changes. There was a lot of discussion and acrimony, and we left it as it was.

It is now almost a year since the original merges and the articles in question have stood as stubs since then, with only a few minor edits. I now propose to reinstate those merges. These merges are effectively already done, as the information was moved back in March.

Merge these articles into Cub Scouts (Boy Scouts of America):

• Bobcat (Boy Scouts of America)
• Tiger (Boy Scouts of America)
• Wolf (Boy Scouts of America)
• Bear (Boy Scouts of America)
• Webelos (Boy Scouts of America)

Merge these articles into Boy Scouts (Boy Scouts of America)

• Scout
• Tenderfoot (Boy Scouts of America)
• Second Class (Boy Scouts of America)
• First Class (Boy Scouts of America)
• Star Scout (Boy Scouts of America)
• Life Scout (Boy Scouts of America)

Merge Eagle Palms into Eagle Scout (Boy Scouts of America)

Before I start applying merge tags to these, I would like some discussion. Once I see how this is going, I will do the proper tagging and solicit more discussion. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 16:52, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Comments

Go for it. Cool cat is only one vote. Suggest notices on talk pages again to cover selves.Rlevse 17:00, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

• Can we see drafts of what the pages would look like before we decide? - evrik ^(talk) 17:01, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

As noted, it is already done. The information from these stubs were merged back in March 2006, the stubs were made redirects and the links were removed from the main articles. In June, the redirects were reverted and the links put back in the articles, but the information remained. Thus the stubs are redundant of the main articles. I will go through and ensure that the few edits that were made in the last year are applied to the main article. This proposal is really to clean up redundancies. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 17:09, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I think it's a great idea to merge them, the GSUSA levels are all in one article. Convenient, and functional. Darthgriz⁹⁸ 17:11, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

OK- I there there is enough support from this straw poll to do the merge tags. Thanks. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 14:12, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

• Just to show that this is a BSA thing, I flattened the above wikilinks to show the real articles they point to. And they are all BSA articles. A merger of all those stub is a good thing: Support.

I thought that was implied by the section title :-)

• And would it be relevant to suggest making it a more Scouting-generic article? Wim van Dorst (Talk) 20:30, 9 February 2007 (UTC).

It? Generic? These are BSA specific articles. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 21:02, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

• 'It' could be Advancement in Scouting or Scout ranking or so. 'Generic' as in not being BSA specific anymore. Just a thought. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 21:14, 9 February 2007 (UTC).

The articles in question are highly BSA-centric. Advancement in Scouting would be a completely separate article. Frankly, with the hundreds of programs, it would be like trying to herd cats. Take a look at the differences in the BSA and GSUSA programs. I would like to clean up the BSA stuff in my lifetime :-) Right now, the closest we have to what you are thinking of is List of highest awards in Scouting. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 21:28, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Featured Picture goal

ScoutingWikiProject has one featured portal, one featured list, several featured articles, but ZERO featured pictures. Do we have any or can we upload any that will meet that standard? Let's give it a shot. I suggested someone nom the pic currently getting beat up at the candidate page, so that won't make it. It's a lovely sunset at Philmont.Rlevse 21:55, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Scout Island

Does anyone have any idea whether the name is somehow related? Chris 06:21, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

No, but it's probably get afd'd one day because there's nothing on notability.Rlevse 10:44, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Scout County/Area articles in UK

Scouting in Cheshire, Scouting in Dorset, Scouting in Cumbria and Scouting in Orkney have just been put up for speedy deletion. They are some of the shorter County/Area articles and they need expanding fast to keep them and preferable adding third party references. There may be more. I'm not sure I have all of these articles on my watch list. I'll check later but am tied up now. --Bduke 04:26, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I have tagged them with {{hangon}} I hope that will help. Chris 05:24, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I have fixed up Scouting in Cumbria and had such a massive edit conflict with Chris that I just overcopied everything. The hangon on the others means we have to expand them. The Orkney one will be difficult. --Bduke 05:56, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Edit conflict? :( I don't understand. Chris 06:14, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I did the whole rewrite in one go using "Show preview", starting before your edit and finishing afterwards. It gave me an edit conflict when I tried to finally save it, so I just copied all of my version and overwrote your version. It would have been too complicated to do anything else. One of the problems of previewing major changes and never saving until the end. --Bduke 06:39, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh good, I locked in on the "conflict" bit, and thought "I'm not that guy" *whew* Chris 06:40, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Scouting in Greater Manchester North is at AfD - see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scouting in Greater Manchester North. Scouting in Greater Manchester East was put to Afd and speedy deleted. Three of the ones above have already gone even though a hangon tag was added to them. Where do we go from here. --Bduke 22:32, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Because of the smaller geographic area and the greater number of political units in Britain, would it be more delete-proof and space effective to start merging articles into "Scouting in England", "Scouting in Wales" and so on? If the deletionists are out in force, the only way I've found to save the information is to merge it into a larger parent article. There is one user here that hates my view on merging, but it's a darn sight better than losing entire articles for notability. Chris 02:58, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm proposing that here rather than at the deletion vote site-if we're going to solve it, let's solve it among ourselves. Chris 02:59, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

I think the answer is to write articles with real content and not just a list of Districts to get it started. If the Manchester one goes down, I'll suggest that we write "Scouting in Manchester" for all the Manchester Counties and then split it later. So far we have not lost an article with real content. I could expand the Cumbria one because I knew where to look and what to look for. I had links with them long ago. We do not have enough UK editors but those we have are pretty good. We need their views and their input to the articles. --Bduke 03:36, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

I apologise for having missed all of this - I don't know how... I'm working my way through the Counties, and trying to boost the information in all of them. I'll focus on the Manchester articles to start with. Horus Kol Talk 11:52, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Style guidelines for Scouting in ... pages

This is meant specifically for the style of the U.S. state pages. I think we need a style guide that lays out how links, OA lodges, district an camps are to be laid out. --evrik ^(talk) 04:36, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

• There appears to be a discussion below about this. --evrik ^(talk) 00:35, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Could someone please explain ...

After reading Scouting in Cleveland and Scouting in City of Coventry, I went to look at Category:Scouting in the United Kingdom. How is this different than the individual councils in the U.S? If every county in England gets its own article, why not every county in the U.S? Just curious. --evrik ^(talk) 04:32, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree that there are rather a lot of them, but the Scout County in England and the Scout Area in Wales and Scotland is the next organisational step down from the Scout Association itself. There is no level in between. So from that perspective they are the same as States in the US. Note that Scout County is very often not the same as administrative counties. So we have articles on Scout Counties/Areas but not on Districts which are below them or Groups. In Australia we have State Scouting articles. Does that clarify it. --Bduke 05:37, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

• Individual councils in the US are grouped by regions that are extensions of the national office. If it's okay to have English counties listed, why do we have so much angst about individual council articles? --evrik ^(talk) 19:03, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I hereby nominate evrik to be our director of BSA unit, camp, district and council articles. Seriously- can a dozen of us manage 306 council articles properly? Fight off vandalism, keep them to a common format and weed out the cruft? Take a look at my comments on Talk:Religious emblems programs (Boy Scouts of America)- that article has been on my todo list ince July 2006 and I just worked my way to it. I understand your point- it would be nice to have all of these articles, but we just don't have the resources. As I noted in an earlier discussion, many new articles are drive by and many have the Athena effect- someone has to manage all of these. How many editors vote on merges and renames- that should give you an idea of how many of use are doing active administration as opposed to editing. There is a balance between editors, articles and quality. With a low editor to article ratio, overall article quality suffers. Bottom line: We either need more editors or fewer articles. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 19:47, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

• Hey ... don't get testy. I was just trying to figure out why we're killing all the U.S. local articles at the same time as we're starting a whole new series of articles in the UK. --evrik ^(talk) 19:55, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't know. You know how it works- you brought it up again, you get to be in charge :-) --Gadget850 ( Ed) 20:34, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

The UK Scout Counties have been a series since before I started here... I agree that many of them need a lot of work, and I am working my way through them, albeit slowly - cleared about 12 or so now. I would like note to be taken that there is not really an equivalence between a UK County and a US county - the comparison is better made between County and State. Perhaps a similar model for the US "Scouting in..." articles can be used where the local councils and troops are listed, and then only articles for really outstandingly notable troops/councils (note, that as yet, no UK Group or District has been deemed notable enough for this status). -- Horus Kol Talk 00:11, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

• I have been short n time, but I would like to rework the guidelines so that any article on local councils that meets a certain standard gets to stay.

Let me give you an example: Take a look at Camp Yawgoog- I just did a quick critique. This article has existed since 28 November 2005, and I'm the first to note that the article is wrongly titled? I would love to have an article on every camp, but not if it means stuff of this quality. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 17:18, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

• Accuracy and quality are important. --evrik ^(talk) 00:44, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

As far as camp articles- Gilwell Park should be the model. At least it does not go into excruciating detail on latrines like Philmont Scout Ranch. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 17:57, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

I have to go with Gadget850 on this one, unless we get more active editors knowledgeable about (note there are over 100 on our member list, but we're really talking no more than 15) many of the BSA articles need to be merged so quality can be kept up. Do we really want 615 stubs out of 13+ articles and be known as a project of low quality stubs? Evrik, if you get enough active editors to form a BSA task force, like we have a GG/GS TF, then I could agree with you, until then I have to agree with Gadget850. Rlevse 17:25, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

How about this: Create a standard for camp articles and council articles. I have a rough draft for camps at User:Gadget850/Camps. We need to hold editors to some standard. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 16:45, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

I like Gadget's idea, this can be worked with.Rlevse 18:14, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

• I have been suggesting for a while that we have a standard - once we get that done, we can revisit our rules. --evrik ^(talk) 00:44, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Userbox migration

The userbox migration initiative hit our project userbox. You can either replace the old link with "User:UBX/Scouting_WikiProject" (see Kingbird or Gadget850 pages) or paste in your own code (see my userpage).Rlevse 01:28, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

And a number of others- see Category:Scouting user templates. Any of the userboxes that have been migrated will show:

Per the Userbox migration, {{User Scout}} was moved to {{User:UBX/Scout}}

Simply update to the new boxes. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 02:31, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Good grief ... migrating "this user is a fan of some random TV show" is one thing ... but why in the world are we migrating templates that are actually project related? --BigDT 05:08, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Got me, I'd like to know too.Rlevse 10:45, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

I'll check into this. Having been involved somewhat in the issue in the past, I do not believe that this template "needs" to be moved. There is a process to contest the migration activists. I'll report back here on a recommendation shortly. --NThurston 16:26, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Userbox migration. Basically, userboxes that are POV or interest should be in userspace not articlespace. As there is no effective difference, I don't understand it. The boxes got moved to User:UBX. We might want to create a User:Scouting and move all of our userboxes to it for control. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 16:32, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Userbox migration is not policy, and even if it were, there is still an allowance for project-related boxes to exist in Template space. Another option is to put them in project space. That would be better than creating a dummy user. We can also contest the move from Template. Which course would you prefer? --NThurston 16:38, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

They haven't gotten to the GG/GS taskforce box yet, but I think that's probably a good idea to stick it in the project space since users come and go, and if stuff gets deleted so does our information. Darthgriz⁹⁸ 16:39, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

I have moved User Scout back. It was moved by a bot, so it is arguable that this was in error and without consensus. However, the larger issue will hit us eventually, so we ought to come up with a plan. Choices are a) try to keep them as they are, b) create a safe haven under the project page, or c) create a place in User: space (such as User:Scouting). --NThurston 16:42, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

On second thought - there is a fourth option: d) accept what the bot is doing - putting them all in User:UBX. This isn't a bad alternative, although it is sort of bizarre attempt to call a rose a daisy. I do worry that eventually User:UBX will cause an renewal of the userbox wars and our templates could get caught up in it. The problem is that the bot is programmed to change all of the hundreds of links to the templates. Who of us will have the energy to change them all back? --NThurston 16:47, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

I'd would go with projectspace. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 17:41, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

It doesn't look like any links are being changed. The old userbox gets edited with a template so that you see a message in the userbox on your user page. See Category:Wikipedia GUS userboxes for the template. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 18:34, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Eventually the same bot that is changing the templates will work its way through the "what links here" and change all of those too. --NThurston 20:55, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I'm the owner of MetsBot, who moved these userboxes. If people here would prefer, I have no problem with moving all of the scouting-related userboxes in Category:Scouting user templates to a subpage of Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting; just give me the word and I'll have those templates moved and their references on Userpages updated. —METS501 (talk) 21:57, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

I like this best of all...please them here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Userboxes. Thanks. Rlevse 22:05, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Userboxes is now a userbox index page. As part of this process, all of the user boxes were also created on User:UBX, but have been changed to redirects. SO... if you want to, you can use the code {{User:UBX/Scout}} instead of the longer code. It is a redirect, but it still works. --NThurston 16:42, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

UK User Templates

Would anyone object if I change the colour of the UK Scouting user templates, because its impossible to read the link text against the background colour... Horus Kol 12:05, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

I see (or actually can't :-) the problem. Go for it. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 16:34, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Give it a shot.Rlevse 20:33, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

By all means. If you want help, let me know. --NThurston 20:56, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

right - well, I've decided to use the corporate green colour - let me know what you think:

• Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Userboxes/Queen's Scout (UK)
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Userboxes/Scouts (UK)

Horus Kol 00:36, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

I like it.Rlevse 01:08, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

• Nice. --evrik ^(talk) 14:33, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

My eyes thank you. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 14:36, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Scouting Userboxes

Regarding scouting-related userboxes:
1. It was inevitable that at some point they would be moved from Template: space. This week, a bot moved them all to User: space as sub-pages of User:UBX. Quick discussion here resulted in all scouting-related userboxes being moved from there to Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Userboxes (which now has a complete index). Bottom line: No more scouting userboxes in Template: space.
2. The choice of whether to have them in Wikipedia: vs. User: is somewhat arbitrary, although there are pluses and minuses to each. Here's a summary of the main issues:

• Length of code: {{User:UBX/Scout}} vs. {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Userboxes/Scout}}
• Safety: It is not clear that User:UBX will withstand an attack by deletionists. Wikipedia: is pretty safe.
• Affiliation: Wikipedia: clearly associates them with our project; User:UBX isn't even a real person.

3. Current status - You can use either the User:UBX or WikiProject code. The User:UBX code for each box contains the correct redirect and the boxes should display properly. It's up to you which you prefer to use. --NThurston 17:20, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for your quick work on this. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 17:50, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
• Beautiful work!. The Userpages page holds them all for display in one place and the subpages thereof hold the code. NEAT!Rlevse 17:51, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

The only issue I see is in maintaining two userbox index pages: Wikipedia:Userboxes/Interests#Scouting and Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Userboxes. If someone adds a new box, there is no real way for them to know to add it to both pages. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 18:28, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Yep, but the one controlled by wiki is not controlled by us.Rlevse 18:40, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

I like having it under our own project.Sumoeagle179 19:05, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

I will volunteer to keep an eye on Wikipedia:Userboxes/Interests#Scouting to keep it updated when changes are made to Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Userboxes. I will also look into the possibility of automating it (which I think is actually possible). --NThurston 19:53, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

User:UBX is an all-around bad idea ... we shouldn't be creating quasi-namespaces like that. I don't know of a good reason for anything project-related to not be in template space, although in template space, it's subject to people wanting to move it, so Wikipedia-space is probably as good as anything right now. The big problem is that meaningful userboxes get lumped in with the ones like "This user has been a fan of MASH since the fourth episode of the third season at 2:05 pm on a Sunday afternoon while sipping RC cola". And then, of course, someone inevitably makes a category, Category:Wikipedians who have been fans of MASH since the fourth episode of the third season at 2:05 pm on a Sunday afternoon while sipping RC cola. See some of the nonsense categories at WP:UCFD like Category:Wikipedians who will not drink Foster's beer, Category:Wikipedians who hope Richard Stallman and Creative Commons will reconcile their licenses, or Category:Wikipedians who believe West Virginia is in the Southern United States. Umm ... who cares? So the morals of this rant are (1) if you want a userbox that is not project-related and nobody other than you is ever going to care about, just use {{userbox}} directly, don't make a template for it. (2) Don't make a user category with your userbox unless there's some really good project-related reason to. (3) Create the userbox in template: space or Wikipedia: space if it is tied to a project and in User: space if it is not, but don't make up a pseudo-namespace for it. --BigDT 20:19, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Having watched most of the discussion on WP:UM for the past while, I sort of agree with BigDT. While User:UBX is sort of a clever solution to the "no userboxes in Template:" issue, it really isn't a solution at all, because it's just a renaming of things. AND since the whole goal of the deletionists was to not have an official namespace for stupid userboxes, it inevitably will rub one of them the wrong way, too, settng off another round of userbox wars, that we want to avoid. So, while I would have been fine leaving them all in Template:, it was inevitable that someone would start messing with them, so a safe harbor in Wikipedia: is probably the best solution. It's just an interesting artifact of the move process, that you can (at least for now) use the User:UBX syntax to achieve the same thing. More to come on indexes, instructions, etc. --NThurston 20:45, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Userboxes/Interests#Scouting now transcludes part of the information from the project userboxes page. If people are good about adding new userboxes there, we should be OK. --NThurston 21:22, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

I've finished migrating the scouting userboxes this project's domain. In defense of User:UBX, I have the following to say: I am not blindly migrating all userboxes in sight to User:UBX. All userboxes related to things which would not help the project are staying in Template space. Only the Scouting WikiProject template should not have been moved, and I apologize for including it. All the templates regarding WikiProjects, languages, Wikipedia affiliations, educational experience, and more are staying in template space; the rest ar being moved. And what's the difference if a bot is placing the templates in User:UBX or if User:Scepia or User:Rfrisbie or one of the many others put the userboxes in their space? This bot just saves them work. The deletionists really don't care about user space, they just want the template space clear of things that don't directly help the project, and claiming that someone was a boy/girl scout as a kid doesn't help the project. —METS501 (talk) 04:59, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Personally, I hope you are right, however, I have my doubts. See Wikipedia_talk:Userbox_migration#User:UBX. The compromise was that the deletionists would leave stuff not in Template: alone, however, that has not always been honored and had to be defended in DRV and other places. As is, putting them on our project page is the best solution because it isolates us from whatever might happen regarding User: space. So, I guess thanks is in order for your cooperative attitude and can-do spirit. --NThurston 14:20, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks to all who helped out in this little crisis. I still don't understand all of the reasoning but I'm not loosing sleep over it as we have a viable solution. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 14:24, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Userbox Instructions

I have some language prepared on "how to add a Scouting userbox to the Project." Where should I put it? --NThurston 15:24, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps on the Userbox talk page. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 15:27, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Template:AmScoutbystate

A non-project user has totally reformatted this template, which is generally fine, except changed some of the categorizations. Will a BSA editor look this over? I don't think Scouting overseas belongs removed from the rest. Chris 07:04, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

It looks fine to me. I could imagine changing the footer just a bit, perhaps having "overseas" on its own line or removing the BSA/GSUSA links. I'll give it some thought. --NThurston 16:09, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

List of Council Shoulder Patches

this is going to be insanely big with the gallery and all. I have about 1500 in my own collection, should we maybe just use one to represent each Council? Chris 03:17, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I saw and agree, it'll be way too big.Rlevse 03:24, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

While a very interesting topic to us patch guys ... well ... umm ... articles that consist of nothing but fair use galleries are usually deleted quickly. See Wikipedia:Fair use criteria #8, Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Kelly Martin2, Wikipedia talk:Logos#Enough, and probably a few other places. We can use a non-free image when necessary to illustrate a point within an article. But if the entire article is nothing but a gallery of non-free images, then they aren't really illustrating anything. A gallery of non-free images is rarely considered acceptable and an article that is nothing but a gallery of non-free images doesn't last too long. --BigDT 03:37, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

comment Which is why we are trying to make Gallery of Europa 2007 Scout Centenary stamps and Gallery of Scout and Guide national emblems better and meatier articles. A kid last year uploaded dozens of Jamboree patches trying to make an article, it was quickly deleted for the reasons you mention. We tried to get him to move the images to the local state articles, no dice. We don't want our good ones deleted. Such galleries really need to have a reason for being, not just "hey, look what's cool." One look at http://www.councilstrip.com/ also shows such resources already exist. Never saw that Wikia thing before, may be a good idea. If it stays here, it needs some writing cleanup, too. Chris 03:56, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Something to consider, though ... and I'm just throwing this out there ... it may be worthwhile to make a Scouting wiki or Scouting patch wiki on Wikia [3]. I don't know how all of that works and what their restrictions with file sizes or non-free media would be ... but it may be worth looking into. --BigDT 03:43, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

And actually, there is a Scouting Wikia already - http://scouting.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page. --BigDT 03:47, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I concur. I was going to make the same points on the article talk page. Didn't we have an article like this a year or so ago? There is also http://www.councilstrip.com/ and http://www.shoulderbank.com/. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 04:05, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Scouting Wikia

FYI, I did some research (as I mentioned in the above thread) and there is a Scouting Wikia. I spent a little time cleaning it up today (it was disgraceful). If anyone finds themselves interested in doing so, articles that would not be appropriate here (articles about patches that are mostly galleries, how-to manuals, etc) can be created there. Wikia, like Wikipedia, requires that images be free (no non-commercial-only images), but fair use is a lot less restrictive. Anyway, I just thought I would throw this out there in case anyone is interested. --BigDT 05:04, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Wow- that's a bang up job on the home page- it was pretty blah. This might be a good spot for the Cub Scout-Boy Scout parents training module I'm working on. This is built off of wikia.com, so it should be stable. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 14:05, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

If it is possible, cooperation with other scoutwiki's would be nice! See www.scoutwiki.org SietskeEN 16:44, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

FYI, to anyone interested, I have emailed Essjay (talk · contribs) to ask about making interwiki links on wikia. Rlevse (and others), what would you think about adding links to Scoutwiki (or any other well-maintained Scouting wikis that might be out there, for that matter) to Portal:Scouting? --BigDT 16:50, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

1st SeaScout Group of Paleo Faliro

This has been redirected once before, and has been recreated without the space between Sea and Scout. Please comment. Chris 06:11, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Was the one without the space deleted? If so, it's clear attempt to avert the system, so you could put it up for speedy delete.Rlevse 12:00, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

WINGS2009

I have just noticed that the new article WINGS2009 does not seem to exist anymore... when I last looked there was information in there that would have been useful for a generic article on the WINGS event which is a major interational event for Scouts and Guides, which I was about to write up (or at least as part of the Scouting in Royal Berkshire article - is there any to retrieve this information? Horus Kol 11:36, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

You can try asking the admin who deleted it: User:Arjun01 --Egel _Reaction? 11:55, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

The reason it was deleted according to the deletion log is that it was substantially a copy of http://www.wings2009.org.uk/info/what.html. I took a look at the deleted article to confirm this. A copy/paste article is generally deleted on sight. If an article is to exist on this subject, it needs to be written from scratch and should cite external sources. --BigDT 19:06, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough - I don't think that the one event deserves an article, but there is already a section on the series of WINGS events in the Scouting in Royal Berkshire, and the information from that site will help improve that. Thanks for helping me to locate the information. Horus Kol 23:14, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Camp articles

We keep merging camp articles into by state articles. Given the sub-par quality of most articles, this is probably good. I'm not normally a deletionist, but most of these are going to get deleted. I would rather see them start in the state article then developed to the point where they need to split.

I would like to develop some guidelines for camp articles that would help editors to develop a quality article. I have started a stub at User:Gadget850/Camps. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 18:42, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Some good points in there - you could cite Gilwell Park as an example... One suggestion, change the "only open to BSA" to "only open to Scouts or Guides"... Horus Kol 23:21, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

I was distracted by this damn work thing. Edit it as you please- if it works maybe we will put it up as a guide. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 23:45, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Who is Dorothy? :)

Hello! i'm starting to write articles about scouting in Ukraine. The first I published is about my rover troop Lisovi Chorty. When it appeared in "New Scout articles", somebody wrote: "somehow, under the radar... (sing it Dorothy!)" So, the question is who is that Dorothy? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Yarko (talk • contribs) 13:53, 2 March 2007 (UTC).

• explanation-I was being silly. "Under the radar" means I found articles on Scouting that we didn't know about before. I made it sound like "Somewhere Over the Rainbow" from Wizard of Oz. Dorothy is the main character in the film. I am sorry, western cultural reference, I meant no systematic bias. Your brother in Scouting, Chris 03:01, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I thought troops weren't allowed to have their own articles.... -- YiS, Jediwannabe 14:03, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

As far as I understand it's more like an international club of former Scouts (one of several in Ukrainian Scouting) but I'm not quite sure. The text gives very few hints on the notability of its subject; if this is not changed the article will be deleted soon. --jergen 14:15, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

It's hard to explain what scout status Lisovi Chorty has. Formaly in Ukraine, USA, Canada and Australia, where Plast officialy registered as scout or youth organization, "Lisovi Chorty" scout troop is rover's and senior's troop. In Soviet Union Plast and scouting at all were forbidden as well as a lot of Ukrainian things. That's why Ukrainians went to other countries and made diaspora there. Of course, Ukrainian scouts continued to work. At first years after IIWW there were Plast troops almost at all countries of West Europe, Both Americas, Australia and even in Tunisia. Members of "Lisovi Chorty" troop also like all Ukrainians spread over the world that's why nowadays we've got them mostly in Europe, North America and Australia. The system of Ukrainian Scouting Organization Plast allows scouts of 18 years to join Rover's troops. Rover's and Senior's troops could has their oseredky (branches) in different cities that's why we has members from a lot of cities and even countries. So, "Lisovi Chorty" troop is not like common scout patrol from local place. We got now over 300 members from age of 18 till 96 and they are present scouts. Well, may be some of them not very active but they're still scouts. May be it's not correctly what I wanted to say, because I'm a little bit busy. By the way, why troops aren't allowed to have their own articles? --Yarko 20:27, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

It does sound very interesting - though I think, as the article stands, it might be better as a secion in the main article on Scouting in Ukraine... Horus Kol Talk 01:46, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Local units such as troops would have to be very notable to meet the Wikipedia:Notability standards. Most of those type of articles start off as either short stubs or an article full of cruft and get put up for deletion. We also have been deleting links for local units that get stuffed into articles- if we allow one, then we have to allow the thousands of units with a web site. I do have a solution for that that I will put up for review. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 01:54, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

As our local post-Soviet Scouting guy, I thought I would give it a look in other places, found it at the national Plast website, it sound to me less a troop and more a fraternal organization, akin to the Knights of Dunamis, Student Scout and Guide Organisation or International Scout and Guide Fellowship. Chris 02:57, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

To Gadget850: what kind of review? I just came to english Wikipedia and don't know all your rules.

To Chris: It's all OK about Dorothy. I've read this book ages ago and simply forgot. You're right more than other who wrote here. I'm going to explain everything in article, but now I'm a little bit busy in my University. Structure of Lisovi Chorty fraternity is very somple. In local cities we've got patrols with 20-30 members and they are united at country level. Troops from other countries formally are separate, but they just divided by countries. Actually, we has the same logos, songs, traditions etc. Just because of Soviets we are divided and living in four countries (Ukraine, USA, Canada, Australia) where Lisovi Chorty registered as local Plast-scout troops. Those troops with their local patrols are unite in fraternity Lisovi Chorty. So, formally we are 4 troops, but in actual fact we are big fraternity with members in few countries.--Yarko 11:21, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Peer Review

Can editors with interest in peer reviewing please peer review South African Scout Association. I'd like to see it reach FA, it currently holds GA, and I don't think it will take that much extra work to get it to FA quality. I'd just like to hear the opinions and any suggestions from my fellow Scouting editors before I nominate it for FA! Thanks in advance. -- YiS, Jediwannabe 14:07, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Find more refs, lead needs to be more of a summary (see Boy Scouts of America for a article on a Scout assn that is both GA and A-class), lead has details that should be in the body (like the requirements for the highest award). Then have Wimvandorst look at it, he's our article improvement coordinator.Rlevse 04:06, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

UK Scout County Layout

I'm trying to standardise the layouts of the Scout County, and have arrived at the layout at User:Horus Kol/Scouting in Royal Berkshire - let me know what you think and point out any improvements you can think of, and then how we might go about making this the recommended layout... Cheers, Horus Kol Talk 03:16, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

It's too listy for a regular article and too much text for a pure list. Also, the two pics to the left just below the intro leave too much white space.Rlevse 04:03, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Any suggestions on how to fix all of that? Horus Kol Talk 11:31, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Put the two pics elsewhere so that the came move up and close the whitespace. Decide if you want a list or article and edit accordingly. Does this help?Rlevse 11:34, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Not really - I think I might be able to do something with the images, but I don't see a way to get this information formatted any other way than I have already... Horus Kol Talk 12:47, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

If you're content to not have it go any higher than a B-class article, the list vs article issue it's a big deal, I was looking at it from that level.Rlevse 12:54, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

To be honest, I never thought that it would get to GA or FA - I'm simply trying to get all the relevant information about any particular Scout County tied up in one article with wikilinks and outlinks where necessary/appropriate so that it is easy for a user to get hold of that information... I realise this is counter to most editors desire to achieve GA or FA, but I personally believe that it is simply not possible for all articles to achieve these statuses... However, if anyone else can see a better way to present the same information, I will be happy to go with that. Otherwise, with the consent of the project, I would like to replicate this format through the other Scout Counties, and start filling the remaining holes we have there Horus Kol Talk 13:06, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

OK with me.Rlevse 13:17, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Horus Kol, I fully agree with "I would like to replicate this format through the other Scout Counties, and start filling the remaining holes we have there" and I'll continue to help. However remember the County articles we have recently lost. We will have to do a really good job with these. They are "Scouting in Cheshire", "Scouting in Dorset", "Scouting in Orkney" and "Scouting in Greater Manchester East". There has been a suggestion that the three Manchester articles might be merged into one for now (with presumably the three County names as redirects) but I have no fixed view on it. I do know it is difficult to get information on these counties as much stuff is in Districts articles for Districts that previously were in different counties. Maybe there are some web pages on old counties somewhere. --Bduke 23:00, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I didn't know we had "lost" any County articles... if i had known they were under threat, I would have added enough information for that to have been avoided. I can get District and Group listings for all UK Scout Counties, as well as campsites... I can also get some Group and District websites, and other information on events and activities... its just a case of knowing where to look, and a little bit of local knowledge helps (I get emailed about all sorts of activities being run all over) Horus Kol Talk 23:40, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

It is up above under the heading Scout County/Area articles in UK. I wondered why you had not waded in. I saved Cunbria as I know quite a bit about it and knew where to look. Chris added "hangon" tags to the speedy'ed articles but they got rapidly deleted. The one that went to AfD was a no consensus keep if I recall and that is where the suggestion about merging the Manchester articles was (and on a talk page of one them I think). --Bduke 00:41, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Mediation on names of non-English speaking Scout organisations

I have been trying to mediate the disagreement about naming articles on non-English speaking Scout organisations. The mediation is at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scouting/Translations mediation. The earlier disagreement is at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scouting/Translations. We have made a little progress, but there is still a major difference of opinion and I would welcome opinions of others. There is agreement to provide an english route into each country with a link to "Scouting in XXX" for all countries "XXX" as a redirect or a disambiguation page or a small article. This helps even english speaking countries where readers may not know the name of the Scout organisation. These links have been completed for all countries, largely by Jergen. There is agreement to use an english name of the organisation if the organisation itself verifiably uses an unique english name in its own documents. The disagreement lies where this is not so. One argument is that then we have to use the official non-english name. The other argument is that we translate the non-english name into english. We can not find a compromise between these points of view and neither side is convinced by the other. Please go to the mediation page and give your opinions under the heading "Broader Scouting community views", at the bottom. --Bduke 07:57, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

deletionists

• Gallery of Scout and Guide national emblems has been put up for Afd at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gallery of Scout and Guide national emblems, please save this from the deletionists! Chris 03:48, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
  • You may want to save it to put on Wikia or something ... there's no way a gallery of non-free images will fly here ... I know that isn't what you want to hear ... but Wikipedia strives to be a free-content encyclopedia. Articles that are completely non-free content don't go over too well. --BigDT 04:20, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
  • If the images are really "fair use" then I do not think we can save it. We have a category of them and that was fixed as OK for "fair use" with a no-gallery display. What argument do you suggest is used on AfD? --Bduke 04:29, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
• I think they're fair use ... see my comments on that page ... --evrik ^(talk)
  • Bruce is right, and thank you for that! I don't think the deletionists will see it that way, though. I have a weird suggestion. *gulp* As they are all saysing "to illustrate the organization in question", well Scouting itself is an organization. I hesitate to suggest merger there, but I also don't want this gallery lost, not during Scouting's centenary. Chris 05:58, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

It's not there use on wiki that is wrong, it's the gallery. I know it's not what you guys want to happen, but BigDT is well versed in this area and you need to listen to his advice on this one.Rlevse 11:18, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

temp fix but please keep fighting and seeking other solutions

At least so we don't lose having all the emblems together, I have created Category:Scout and Guide national emblems to be a subcategory of the Scout logos category, like Category:Boy Scouts of America logos is, but I am doing something wrong, I can't get it to show up as a subcat, please help, thanks. Chris 08:29, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Chris - edited the above so the cats show but do not put this page into the cat. I can not see what is wrong. --Bduke 08:36, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Something else is wrong, the cat only shows one image..????Rlevse 11:18, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

I'll come up with a fix this this morning. --NThurston 14:32, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

It turns out that it's not broke. Here's what's happening - Sub-cats only show up as sub-cats where their starting "letter" is included in the current list. Since Scout logos is so long, "S" doesn't show up until you have hit "next 200" a few times. The only solution is to pick a cat name that starts with "A" or "B." Any suggestions? --NThurston 14:35, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

OK, but why is only one image showing in the cat?Rlevse 17:46, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Each image needs to be tagged with Category:Scout and Guide national emblems. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 18:07, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes. Apparently, the cat has only been placed on one two so far, and is a good idea to wait if we are thinking of using a different name. Also note that adding cats is not immediate. Sometimes it takes a while for them to start showing up.--NThurston 18:56, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure how useful this is as a gallery. The BSA logo is named Fdl-gold.jpg- not a very descriptive name. Extending it with Category:Scout and Guide national emblems|Boy Scouts of America doesn't help, as this changes the alphabetization but not the name. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 18:21, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Well... It probably isn't very useful as a gallery since they can't be displayed there either. But at least they are all grouped together. The image naming thing has come up before. I am not sure what to say on that other than people should be careful to write descriptive image names wherever possible. It is possible, but cumbersome to rename them. You have to download it, then upload it again with the new name; change all the links; then request the old one to be deleted. --NThurston 18:54, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

My comments

I'm posting the same comment I gave on the AFD. This issue isn't just a legal issue. I think I'm on solid ground when I say that under US copyright law, the doctrine of fair use makes us perfectly free to have this article. If the law were the only issue, that's a non-issue. If this were Gallery of news media photos, forget it, we would be infringing on their right to exclusively market their product. But a gallery of logos of non-profit organizations should not be a problem UNDER THE LAW. It is, however, a problem on WIKIPEDIA. Our fair use policy is intentionally more restrictive than what we could get away with. This is because Wikipedia is a free-content encyclopedia. We only use non-free images under a claim of fair use when it is a necessity - we don't have articles that contain no free content. Sometimes, this is inconvenient. Sometimes it's annoying. I am a Scouter and have been involved with Scouting for 20 years (since Weblos). I like this article. I enjoy looking at it. But, for the goal of being a free-content encyclopedia, we sometimes have to make compromises and one of them is that we don't have articles containing nothing but non-free images. --BigDT 18:05, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Can we do galleries on Commons? That of course begs the question of what images could be placed on Commons. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 14:23, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

My understanding is that fair use images are not allowed on Commons, so Commons is not a solution. --Bduke 21:41, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I was perusing Commons today and had pretty much come to the same conclusion. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 22:16, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

It's been deleted, but would you guys do me a favor? I went back and counted the deletes and keeps, and I cannot say that the deletes had a majority, would you guys count and see which I am missing? Chris 01:45, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

It's that it is against wiki policy to have a gallery of non-free images, in such a case the votes don't matter.Rlevse 01:52, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Which would be fine, but if you will read the later discussions, most of it was for holding or for making an exception, as there are times Wiki policy can be bent. My request still stands. Chris 01:54, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

AfD is not a vote. As you note, in the end the only argument for keeping it was WP:IAR. The closing admin chose to follow the rules. That was clear in his remarks on closing the debate. A pity, but there it is. --Bduke 02:03, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Chris--did you follow BigDT's advice on this 0420 Mar 7 entry? As much as you may not agree or like it, your chances of getting this one overturned about slimmer than snowball staying frozen in 120 degree heat.Rlevse 02:17, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

What an insensitive way to have said that. I was just making a request for a count. Chris 02:38, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

related thought

Since there is Category:Boy Scouts of America images for photos and maps and non-logo stuff, we need a similar category for the rest of Scouting. If there is already one, oops and please direct me to it. Chris 05:29, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Currently Category:Scouting images sounds like what you're looking for. --NThurston 14:30, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Backpacking

Hello,

As part of the Scouting WikiProject, You all may be interested in the newly formed WikiProject Backpacking, an effort to increase the quality of Backpacking related articles and media on Wikipedia. I hope that we may work together with other closely related WikiProjects (this one included) to make camping and packing articles the best they can be!

Regards,

-Leif902 13:35, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Scouting Featured Topics

I have made some lists for a some possible Featured Topics at User:Horus Kol/Possible Scouting Featured Topics - I suggest that we fix on a set of Fts to work towards, and then use the articles listed for each Topic in turn in order to improve those articles as much as we can, and also to gain FT status. I would also like to propose that we remove the current Scouting Topic template from all articles until we determine what Topics and articles we aim to include... Horus Kol Talk 23:23, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree and would like to help with this. I propose developing a "unified" topics template, such as {{Navbox generic}} as used in {{Dilbert}} where sub-topics can be grouped on a single template. Of course, we would modify colors/images to make it more Scout-y. --NThurston 13:46, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

okay - any comments on the three topics I already started pencilling out? Horus Kol Talk 14:37, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Here's a preliminary unified template. As for the topics - maybe:

• A "Scouting" topic based on the articles in Category:Scouting has a chance.
• Scouting in the U.S. or BSA? BSA has a fair shot at making FT. Scouting in the U.S. has a lot of significant gaps.
• Scouting in the U.K. could eventually work, but needs some work.
• I propose a "Scouting founders or pioneers" topic, as well as "History of the Scouting Movement" as two areas that have a chance at FT.

I suggest that we use the current categorizations as a good starting point, excluding any stubs. --NThurston 14:43, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

• The template is too big, but each section by itself is good. The template for an FT should only apply to the topic in question. The BSASeries template could possibly double duty as the FT template for a BSA topic.Rlevse 15:01, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

OK. Actually, BSA could be nominated as is for FT. It meets all of the criteria. So, should we be thinking of using a BSASeries-like template for other potential topics? In any case, we need to work on what those topics might be. What about the ones listed in User:NThurston/sandbox/test as a starting point for the discussion? --NThurston 15:23, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

• I like the template, but I agree with Rlevse that its too big - I suggest that we only have the Scout Movement section on all articles, and the relevant topic (Scouting in the UK, Scouting in the US, etc) where appropriate.

Is there anyway we can have a new section in the project space for creating topic lists, and showing the statuses of the various component articles (and any "gaps", such as those alluded to for Scouting in the US)? Horus Kol Talk 15:25, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

• Fix - There's an easy/reasonable way to do this - Create a separate template for each "topic." Each of these would look like a slice of the current working template at User:NThurston/sandbox/test. Each of these templates is only included at the bottom of the articles in the template. Each of these templates would have a small (one line max) footer on the bottom that links to the other Scouting topics.
  Currently, BSA has its own topic template. I say let's not mess with that. But let's think carefully about how topics should be organized and what articles should be in each one before we do too much. --NThurston 15:37, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Note: See University of Kansas for a good example of what multiple-topic articles would look like and University of Southern California for an example of an article with a big topic template. --NThurston 15:45, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

• Try this - I have fiddled with the test template to streamline it as much as possible, but still have access to all articles by topic available. In its current format, it could be included on all Scouting articles. The default is set to "show" the Scouting Movement list, and hide the rest. This can be customized to show or hide any combination on any particular page. Now there are two lines of thoughts on this: the template situation, and the organization of topics. --NThurston 16:22, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

• As for topic lists - we already have the categories. Rather than duplicate them manually, let's just use them. --NThurston 15:38, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

• Looking good... as for the lists - the categories only show what is already there, not what is missing... for example, there needs to be a Guiding article which is an analogue of the Scouting article, but you don't see that by looking at the category (currently it redirects to the Girl Guides disambiguation article). There are also many articles in some categories which aren't necessarily needed in the topic (for example, the UK Scout Counties). Horus Kol Talk 16:45, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

• I see. Would we want to use the Category descriptions as a place to document what's missing? I'd rather consolidate everything in one place, and since we already have a place, let's just use it for everything. --NThurston 16:51, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

• That makes sense - I'm not sure how you'd go about doing that, though... Horus Kol Talk 17:39, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

What a cool template! Chris 21:57, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Oldest living GSUSA Girl Scout

There was a blurb on the 101 year old oldest living Girl Scout on the local Fox TV station tonight. Her name is Marianne Elser Crowder (spelling?) born in Colorado Springs in April 1906, joined Troop 4 in 1918 and got her Golden Eaglet, which was then the GSUSA highest award. She now lives in California. Since there are always articles on the oldest living person in different countries and so on, would such an article be worthwhile? Chris 04:59, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't think she really warrants her own article, since she probably won't always be the world's oldest girl scout, and there probably isn't enough on her to keep an article. However, it probably deserves a spot in GSUSA. Darthgriz⁹⁸ 04:45, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

That's the correct spelling of her name. I've just come across a newspaper report here with it in. Kingbird 20:54, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Scouting Topics & Categories

I have added an example on Category:Scouting. A subsection like that could be added on the category pages that correspond to topics we are trying to develop. Take a look and let me know if you think it will work. --NThurston 17:56, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm not so sure we need a separate article on Guiding. It and the boy side of the movement are already in Scouting. How would a Guiding article be significantly different? Look at Boy Scout and Girl Guide and Girl Scout, they're not that much different. If we create Guiding, we'd have to create Boy Scouting or rewrite Scouting as boy only. I very strongly feel we should keep the Scouting article as is and not create a separate Guiding article. We had a similar debate before. I'd like to know what Kingbird has to provide as input here.Rlevse 18:04, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Maybe that wasn't the best example, but it was the one Horus mentioned. Anyway, can you think of an obvious gap in one of the proposed topics that needs to be filled with an article that I can use an example? --NThurston 18:26, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I have finished the formatting for {{Scouting}} and have added it to Scouting. --NThurston 16:41, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Nice work!Rlevse 17:17, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm not entirely sure about having every topic in the same template, even if it is collapsible... for one thing, having the Scouting in the UK and Scouting in the US topics there gives scope for all 200 or so countries to be in there... its not hard to see how that can get rather unwieldy...

Is it possible to split the templates, like I have done in my sandbox:

• User:Horus Kol/Template:Scouting
• User:Horus Kol/Template:Scouting in the United Kingdom

Horus Kol Talk 17:21, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Of course that's possible. Initially, I was going to do something like that with a "cross-topic" footer on each of the six templates. However, it turns out that it's not an easy thing to program, and this ended up being much easier, while accomplishing the same end. It's especially useful if we employ the show/hide parameters so that articles in the same topic(s) are shown, while those in other topics are hidden. I also think that with our current five fledgling topics we'll be ok for a while. As it really grows that would be an option to consider. --NThurston 17:32, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough, but if we use a single template in all of those articles, then its going to cause a lot of work later on if we split the topics into seperate templates... don't get me wrong - I do like what you have done, and it loks pretty swish - I'm just trying to save work in the future... Horus Kol Talk 17:39, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Thinking forward, my plan to reduce the work would be to employ a parameter switch on the existing template instead of creating multiple new templates. That would make it pretty simple as it would just be changing a parameter using the "What links here" or even the templates themselves to find the articles. We could probably find a bot-owner that would automate it for us. By the way, your input and comments really helped make this better than what we started with. And I think we will end up with several FT's out of this. --NThurston 18:13, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay - I think I'm pretty much sold... now, about the actual articles - shall I post in the template talke page? Horus Kol Talk 18:30, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes. I think that's the natural place to have that discussion. If it's something obvious, just be bold. --NThurston 19:02, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

We've been picked out in a discussion on Featured Topics about "obvious gaps" - which might be useful when it comes to determinig the final list of articles in the various topics we are building up... Horus Kol Talk 12:24, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scouting in Vatican City (2nd nomination)

See this debate. Article speedy deleted and suggestion that all other "Scouting in X" where Scouting does not exist in X will be deleted also. My suggestion is to let them go and write them again when we have real information that Scouting does have a presence and we can write something about it. --Bduke 01:58, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Someone already deleted it.Rlevse 02:22, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, and man, aren't they vitriolic about it? Jerks. You'd think we'd written an article for canonization of Osama. Does anyone have a contact at WOSM, so we can put this to rest? Chris 03:25, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Why wasn't the article simply made a redirect to Scouting in Italy? Horus Kol Talk 11:42, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I think a safe solution is to make an article on "Countries without Scouting". I have merged the info into the Scouting in Italy article.Rlevse 12:26, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

The thing is, what they're talking about is countries without _recognized_ Scouting. There are only six countries actually without Scouting, and of those, all but North Korea have articles on the periods they actually _did_ have Scouting. Chris 14:55, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Good point, one option is of course to leave them alone and see what happens.Rlevse 15:33, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

There is only one user proposing the deletion of other articles.

Some of the articles on Scouting in countries without recognised organaization were really in bad shape. I tried to improve some of them:

• Escuteiros de São Tomé e Príncipe
• União Nacional dos Escuteiros de Timor Leste
• National Scout Association of Eritrea
• Les Scouts de Djibouti.

There are some other articles with very little content that could be proposed for deletion; we should not wait until this time but try to expand them (with good references); I changed the existing references to scout.org:

• Scouting in Somalia - existence of Scouting confirmed by UNICEF source
• Scouting in Samoa
• Scouting in Guinea-Bissau - got name membership etc.
• Scouting in Equatorial Guinea

and surely some more. --jergen 22:11, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Randy, the "leave them alone and see what happens" would work if either outside Wikipedians were enlightened and allowed our vision for this Project to come to fruition, or were not so virulent when they _do_ come after Scouting articles. Neither is the case, sadly, as you have seen recently, and thank you so much for your assistance on that, brother. Jergen is right, we cannot wait for someone to junk them just because they have a bee in their bonnet. There's about half a dozen of us that routinely work on the international Scouting articles, but we have several dozen members. I invite all BSA members and indeed all members of our project to check out the List of World Organization of the Scout Movement members, where the list stops at "Non-sovereign territories...", pick an article and just see if you can improve it graphically, even, though you may not know anything about the organization. Treat it like it was an article on your local Scouts, how you would dress it up... Would it help to add the {{infobox WorldScouting}} box to all of them? We really probably should do that to all World Scout org articles. Thanks for listening, sisters and brothers. Chris 04:33, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Chris on this one - we should look to at least put the infobox on each national Scouting article... Horus Kol Talk 11:03, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

If we include the infobox in articles with very little content - isn't this like stating: There is no relevant information avalaible? --jergen 11:31, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Guiding, Scouting, Boy Scout, Girl Guide and Girl Scout

I'm making a case for a Guiding analogue to Scouting because, at the moment, the content of the Girl Guide and Girl Scout article has a lot of generic Guiding information - unlike the Boy Scout article. I don't think having a Guiding article necessarily needs Scouting to be rewritten, but the general history and development of Guiding needs it own article seperate to the Scouting and Girl Guide and Girl Scout articles... Horus Kol Talk 11:49, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Interesting idea. I can see some sense in it but I can't predict how acceptable it will be to the Project at large. Kingbird 20:20, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

There's been a bit of discussion at Talk:Girl Guide and Girl Scout about this matter since I last posted. Might I tentatively suggest a solution? Move the offending information in Girl Guide and Girl Scout to Scouting. I don't think that Scouting entirely reflects this project's policy that Scouting covers a large number of organisations/movements/groups yet, but in time it may well do so. Moving this information around and saying "Hey, this should go somewhere!" could help us work out how Scouting can cope with the great diversity of situations it is trying to cover. One of those coping strategies might be that we need more side articles, like a Guiding and Girl Scouting, but I think that this is going to be a decision that is going to evolve over a period of time. Now I'm going to hide behind the parapet while the bullets fly! Kingbird 20:28, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

No bullets... I think its an elegant solution. My only comment is that when it comes time to ge a topic together, we will have Scouting but a Guiding article will be conspicuous by its absence... now the fact that Guiding is Scouting may be appreciated by people familiar with Scouting, but for people not familiar with it, they will come looking for Guiding and not find it... even if the Guiding article is only a stub to start with, that will be better than the current situation. Horus Kol Talk 22:54, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Horus Kol, but point out that anybody looking for Guiding will find that is a perfectly useful redirect to a disambiguation page. --Bduke 23:25, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Featured Topic - BSA?

It seems to me that Boy Scouts of America is close to meeting the criteria to be a featured topic. --NThurston 19:14, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

it's definitely the closest. Maybe we should ask a FT regular for input on that one before we submit it.Rlevse 21:02, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Don Bosco Catholic Scouting Movement

Can anyone familiar with Scouting in the Philippines comment on whether this is a major organization or is it the equivalent of a single troop? The yahoo group linked in the article has a grand total of two members, so that doesn't inspire confidence. Unless I'm missing something, this looks like the equivalent of the Virginia Tech campus Scouts. If it is significant (and not just a single troop), a source needs to be found for the logo and some external sources of information need to be found. --BigDT 11:54, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Local Scout group, member of the Boy Scouts of the Philippines. --jergen 16:03, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

then likely should be deleted.Rlevse 17:07, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Need Input - Scouting Topics

I invite all to recommend articles that should (or should not) be included in the several Scouting Topics that are beginning to coalesce. The discussion should happen at Template talk:Scouting. Please keep in mind:

1. Only 'mature' topics that have enough articles to be considered a topic are included. New topics can be added later, when there are enough articles to justify a topic.
2. Not every article has to be part of a topic.
3. Articles can be part of more than one topic.
4. The end goal is for a topic to be a featured topic - a collection of good articles on a subject that leave no obvious gaps. This process may help us identify needed articles as well as articles that should be prioritized for improvement.

--NThurston 20:28, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Scouting project style and content guidelines?

I can't find a link to the style and content guidelines for Scouting articles? Horus Kol Talk 07:39, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

See the second gold bar on the navigation pane: "Rules and Standards". Is this what you're looking for? Rlevse 09:55, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

can't believe i missed that... cheers Horus Kol Talk 10:08, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Naczelnik ZHP

Hi guys, just been sorted through some stub articles (as part of the StubSensor project), and I was just wondering if you guys could look into the above mentioned article, personally it looks like something that should be included in a master page or something, never the less, I think it's appropriate to remove the stub template, but I'm wondering if a 'Scouting Personnel' article might be more appropriate and then combine this and the other lists. (Maybe include more information of the Personnel ranks). --NigelJ ^talk 00:09, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

We need a Polish Scouting expert for that.Rlevse 19:05, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Surprised

... at the Support votes on Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Boy Scouting (Boy Scouts of America). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:24, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't know that your comment warrants a response. Why would there not be support from the parent project? Chris 04:49, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Oreland Boy Scout Troop 1

Another troop article, at least this is well written, but still no notability outside of its local area. If it was the oldest troop in Penna.... Chris 04:49, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

There is no assertion of notability whatsoever, so it atleast needs a notability tag. Project rules do not support local unit articles unless extremely notable. It'd probably also get deleted if afd'd.Rlevse 09:54, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Its has it own scout camp (Hawk Mountain Camp) so it can be merged with that article and/or Scouting in Pennsylvania. If project rules support local scout camp articles.--Egel _Reaction? 10:18, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Akela

I noticed Akela this morning. Articles should only cover a single topic. We can split it several different ways and I wanted to run it by here first. We can have:

1. Akela = disambiguation page, Akela (Scouting) = the Scouting Akela, Akela (Jungle Book) = the Jungle Book Akela
2. Akela = the Scouting Akela, Akela (Jungle Book) = the Jungle Book Akela
3. Akela = the Jungle Book Akela, Akela (Scouting) = the Scouting Akela

I am inclined to use option #1 but I wanted to see if there was any disagreement. --BigDT 12:36, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

I vote for Option 1. Rlevse 12:42, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Ok ... it's done. I split the history so that the Scouting-related edits are in the Scouting copy of the article. --BigDT 16:22, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

If you check the todo list, there is a request for an article on The Jungle Book and Scouting. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 20:50, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Merge-stubbing more camps

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

I tagged near a dozen new camp stubs-the reason still remains, no matter how well the articles are written, the subject matter is still not notable outside a local area. If anything, some of them could be expanded into Council articles, but we still face the same problems we faced last fall. We do not want the powers that be to decide we're Scoutcruft, like malls or junior highs. Chris 05:00, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

• You seem to be proud of this in a perverse way. Rather than deleting these, maybe you could work on expanding the artilces. One of the saddest features of this WikiProject is that we work to delete our own articles before someone else does. Truly pathetic. --evrik ^(talk) 19:18, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Evrik, I resent your tone and your implications. I am going by the established project guidelines, and not making up my own rules for things when I disagree with them, as you do. Every so often you do something really positive, then you negate it with statements like above. Chris 21:58, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Further, when things are merged, the information is left intact. Nobody is deleting anything. Chris 22:01, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

• User:Kintetsubuffalo, the established project guidelines are just guidelines, and we just made them up. We could change them if we wanted to. If we actually had cojones we would change them to something more affirmative and we would work to defend the articles in question.

When you said, "it fails notability-it is not a Treasure Island or a Brownsea," (the Kintetsubuffalo standard) it really shows that you don’t understand the value of how the information is presented. The information may be copied to a larger article, but the article itself is lost. The article is what gets picked up by google and the article is what draws people in to our work. Why worry about the deletionists when we have Kintetsubuffalo?

You can resent the tone and the implications if you wish, but after you chimed in on that RfC you lost credibility with me and it makes it hard for me to assume good faith. If I told you what I really thought, I would be violating several points of the Scout Law. I agree with the comment, "I see mild bad-faith on the part of the nominator as this is one of several camps they have put up for merging." I think that your actions verge on trying to make a point and are disruptive. --evrik ^(talk) 16:21, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Apparently you completely ignore "comment on content, not the editor." That's fine, be assured I feel likewise about you. I've had to rescue or recreate enough deleted material trashed by those that didn't even bother to merge to anywhere, I know what my credentials and motives are, and don't lose any sleep regarding your personal opinion of me. We've already discussed how you violate Helpful, Friendly, and Courteous. How about you start focusing on why particular articles get toasted when others don't, and stop bashing me for trying to save the information in a manner in line with the direction Wikipedia is heading? We're all contributors here, and if I was seen as disruptive, I am sure several other project members would have told me so. Chris 18:46, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

• • This isn't really about content is it? It's about the actions of the members of the WikiProject. As for "We've already discussed ..." who, you and your invisible playfriend? As for being disruptive, and being told so, I'll repeat what someone said earlier about your tagging the articles, "I see mild bad-faith on the part of the nominator as this is one of several camps they have put up for merging." Again, why worry about the deletionists when we delete our own articles first? --evrik ^(talk) 19:00, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
• The problem is that many (not all) of these articles are created by "drive by editors"- they create the article for their favorite camp or some such and we never see them again. Several of these (again, not all) have the "Athena effect"- they appear "fully formed" because they are copied from another site. I take no pleasure from deleting such text- it is just proper maintenance; indeed I find it rather disheartening to do so. Many of these camp articles are full of cruft (Philmont Scout Ranch is bad enough with its details on latrines) and few are actually informative or make enjoyable reading. I would have to disagree with Chris on a point- a well written and informative camp article that is referenced enough to show notability would be welcome. As far as expanding these articles- I know nothing of Log Cabin Wilderness Camp for example, and I really have no interest. There are few enough dedicated editors here as it is, and I have many unfinished projects. I would rather see the state articles expanded to where a really good council article could be forked, than have to manage hundreds of camp and unit articles. We already waste enough time on vandalism and the like. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 20:46, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Ed, I have left the larger, more developed articles untagged, the list is actually about three times that long, and I agree with you, they need to be expanded into council or state articles. Chris 21:58, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

• Gadget850 ( Ed), I agree that many of the articles that are created by short-term editors that just want to see their favorite camp in print. I think that articles that are copied from other sources are an issue (I like the term Athena effect BTW, maybe we can coin the term, WP:Athena effect). I agree that those articles need to be pared down. However, we face another problem as we merge them – we junk up the Scouting in ... articles as we put more and more content in the article.

I disagree with the way we as a wikiproject handle these articles. I think that a small article describing the camp, its location, when it started, etc. is a good start – this is why we have stubs. I don't like "cruft" either, and I really don't like troop information in the articles. I also think that we overstep any authority we may have by constantly merging the articles (which is in effect a deletion) – I think that each of the camps has a local history and we are doing a disservice by not keeping the articles separate. We should pare them down and we should protect them – so they can be expanded later. If they get nominated for deletion, we should advance the opinion that, "individual scout camps have the right to be articles." We should stand together on this. If we stand together on this, there is no way any article would be deleted – but instead we do it ourselves. --evrik ^(talk) 15:58, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

This is a major issue that should be settled. It keeps coming up, so there are obviously strong feelings on both sides. There are at least two camps with good points to make. While we do have a project rule on this issue, the fact that it keeps coming leads me to feel we should relook at it. I hope it doesn't take months to settle.Rlevse 16:20, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

• Th discussion is here Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Scouting/RulesStandards#Council.2C_District.2C_Troop_articles. --evrik ^(talk) 16:27, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Time-out I think Chris and evrik could use a timeout here, so I'm calling one. Let's get back to the real question, which is a legitimate one and handle it appropriately. I'm adding a new section below for this purpose. Let's let the past become history and talk through this on its merits. --NThurston 19:09, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

• I agree. I've moved the discussion back over here, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scouting/RulesStandards. --evrik ^(talk) 19:19, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Category:Boy Scouts of America Local Councils

Hi, I was just looking at this category after nominating one of the pages in it for deletion, and I see it's got some explicit criteria, but it seems that around a dozen individual articles have shown up. Does anybody involved in the project want to clean it up, or mind if I do it? FrozenPurpleCube 17:49, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

• Which articles specifically? --evrik ^(talk) 16:46, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, a quick list would be:

1. Chester County Council
2. Chief Cornplanter Council
3. Circle Ten Council
4. Connecticut Rivers Council
5. Connecticut Yankee Council
6. Cradle of Liberty Council
7. French Creek Council
8. Greater Alabama Council
9. Greenwich Council
10. Housatonic Council

And that's just the first column. I see another 8 more in the other two columns. Looking at the pages, I see nothing especially notable about any of them, and some of the articles are in very poor shape. FrozenPurpleCube 17:07, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

• There are some quality problems with some of them. Feel free to tag the poor ones and we'll see about cleaning them up. --evrik ^(talk) 17:27, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, I think the best choice is to merge them, or simply delete them, rather than cleanup. But if there's a change in policy being discussed somewhere, it might wait till then. None of the pages were vandalized as far as I could tell, so that's nothing that needs to be done. FrozenPurpleCube 17:32, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

We have been discussing this back and forth for quite a while. I started a discussion on developing a standard that includes notability, quality, standards and process for these types of articles. You are quite welcome to review and comment on it at User:Gadget850/Camps. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 17:46, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedians in Scouting (UK)

Category:Wikipedians in Scouting (UK) is proposed for merging into Category:Wikipedians in Scouting or possibly now, in the debate, renamed to Category:Wikipedians in The Scout Association. See Wikipedia:User categories for discussion#Category:Wikipedians in Scouting (UK). Nobody except me seems to have commented to a debate that started two days ago. --Bduke 02:31, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

I did not know, I voted. Rlevse 11:35, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

I can't find where this is being discussed... -- Horus Kol Talk 02:15, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Closed already, result [[4]].Rlevse 02:30, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

That was quick - 4 days! Still, good to see the decision was to keep. -- Horus Kol Talk 03:54, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Tell me about category creation

If you create a category, let me know. I have a watch set on every single Scouting cat that I know of.Rlevse 11:35, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

History

Does anyone know where in the Wikipedia:Archived delete debates all the articles we lost in the mass purge were listed? --evrik ^(talk) 21:15, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Scouts and copyright

L.A. Boy Scouts new merit badge: 'Respect Copyrights' --evrik ^(talk) 16:56, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

It is not a merit badge, regardless of the article. It is a local award sponsored by the MPAA [5]. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 17:51, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

• I never said it was, but I still found it humorous. Think we can use it in an article? --evrik ^(talk) 17:56, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps in the LAAC article? I'm guessing that this is available to any Scout, but the BSA is certainly not promoting it. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 19:34, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

• The LAAC article needs to be fleshe out, but I can't find anything on their history. How would you integrat it into the article? -evrik ^(talk) 20:18, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

"Local awards" perhaps? Although it appears national in scope. I really haven't heard anything about it since it came out. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 22:18, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Or better yet, simply note that the LAAC and the MPAA worked together to develop the program. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 22:19, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

• For reasons of circular logic, I think we need a picture of the badge. ;) --BigDT 02:39, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Proposed policy on naming of Scouting organisations in non-English speaking countries

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Mediation of earlier disputes on this matter has been going on at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scouting/Translations mediation since January. It is time that we try to close the debate. The four points below, along with two related points, have been discussed on the mediation page and agreed by two of the original three participants in the earlier dispute. The third editor has not responded. Note that I sought advice at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (use English)#Naming of organisations but there has been no response. The mediation page also contains debate and agreement from the two partcipants on the naming of five organisations, some of which were previously in dispute.

Main points

1. For naming articles on Scout organisations/associations, we use an English name if the organisation itself verifiably uses an unique English name in its own documents (if we can not find such a name, we ask the organisation for a name and a source for its use).
2. If no official English name becomes available, we seek consensus on whether there is one clear translation to English of the organisation's name and use that. If there are several translations that differ only trivially, we seek consensus on whether one of them can be used. By trivial, we mean different prepositions (e.g. "in" or "of") or word order ("Scout Association" or "Association of Scouts")
3. If no consensus is reached on point (2), we seek consensus whether the "Scouting in XXX" proposal (see below) can be used to write a complete article on all aspects of Scouting in a particular country to replace the article with a contentious title.
4. Failing resolution of an English name from points (1) - (3), we use the official non-English name.

Related points

Separate from these key proposals we note:

1. We use the now completed "Scouting in XXX" proposal to give English names for readers to find articles about Scouting in all countries, whether English speaking or not, and without having to know the name of the Scout organisation in the country. These can be redirects, disambiguation pages or articles. In some cases we should also create "Guiding in XXX" or "Scouting and Guiding in XXX" links in the same way as above.
2. We will be extremely liberal in the use of redirects both to the "Scouting in XXX" articles (e.g. "Scouting in USA") and to the individual articles of organisations (almost any plausible translation - redirects are cheap).

Summary

We try to find whether the organisation uses an official English name. Failing that we see whether there is an obvious translation. If that is not unique, are the different translations trivial in the sense that they translate back to the same name. We use Scouting in XXX, for all countries XXX including English-speaking countries, as a redirect, a disambiguation page or a brief article. If the first two points do not resolve the name, we consider using Scouting in XXX to cover ALL aspects of Scouting in the country. If that is not acceptable, due perhaps to there being many Scout organisations and the argument is only about the name of one of them, we use the non-English name used by the organisation itself. We then use any English translation as a redirect to the non-English title. Note, if this summary conflicts with the proposals above, please try to correct it.

Discussion

Please add your views below on whether this naming policy should be added to Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/RulesStandards#Article names and used for correcting names of current articles and for future articles. --Bduke 23:41, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Support

• I believe this policy is a workable compromise and I urge the Project to accept it. It is also likely to be better accepted by editors outside the Project than the current practice. For example, the name of Association of Scouts in Honduras was changed to that English name from the original Spanish name in good faith by a non-Project member who resides in Honduras (or at least Central America), but is not a Scout. It is difficult to see how we could support reverting that change. --Bduke 23:41, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
• I can live with this. Thanks to those who put all the hard work into it.Rlevse
• Well done guys on reaching a clear and satisfactory proposal. -- Horus Kol Talk 10:29, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
• This looks very good, well though-out, and diligently worked on. A point that is not mentioned above: an page such as "Scouting in XXX" should have a list of organizations where necessary, such as Scouting in the United States does. —ScouterSig 21:06, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • I thought that was obvious. If it is a redirect, then it just redirects. If it is a disambiguation page, it links to articles on all associations in the country, so clearly lists them. If it is an article, it is like Scouting in the United States as you say, although I personally think that article has got over-long. Do you have an example that you think is a problem? --Bduke 23:25, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
    • No, I can't think of any apparent problems; but WikiProjects too easily run into naming disputes, and I worried about this a touch. I'm glad to hear that it was thought of by the group as well. —ScouterSig 20:37, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
• Fine by me. --evrik ^(talk) 04:34, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
• I think this is quite workable.Sumoeagle179 11:33, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Oppose

Conclusion

Well, it seems we have no objections so this policy appears to be acceptable. My job is nearly done. I will add it to Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/RulesStandards, then fix up redirects and so on for the five articles we trialled, and finally work on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scouting/Translations. For the last, I plan to basically archive the existing page, but keep the large table under the heading "matrix" and modify to provide a basis for applying the new procedure for naming. That may take a bit of time as I'm busy in real life and will have to take a Wikibreak next week. So in the meantime, please comment on how the process continues from here. With many thanks to all who helped to progress this mediation. --Bduke 07:06, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

I have, as above, added the new proposal to Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/RulesStandards, fixed up as many redirects as I could think of for the five articles we trialled, archived Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scouting/Translations, but left the tables to guide us in future. Please check the redirects for the five associations. The table at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scouting/Translations needs a lot of work before it is useful. Anyone who cares to, please try to improve it. I will look at it, but not for a while. --Bduke 09:29, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Scouting "Fair Use" Images

NThurston seems to have opened me a can of worms... he questioned the use of the Scout Logo licence template on the maps of the UK Scout Counties (example: Image:Scout-uk-map-county-cumbria.gif), and I saw his point, and so when I moved on to the next article, I used the fair use licence... now its being disputed. Now, I'm a simple lad, and I feel that these maps are produced by The Scout Association for this very purpose - it is allowed that any material generated by The Scout Association can be used in and for the promotion Scouting activities. So, could the Scout Logo licence be expanded to include such items as these maps? -- Horus Kol Talk 01:19, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry about the can of worms. I was correcting a different existing problem, and now seem to have shifted to another problem. This must be related to the Law of Conservation of Problems. In looking at the dispute, I actually tend to agree with their reasoning - A free image version of the map should certainly be available or could be created without too much effort. In fact, I question(ed) whether these maps are really fair use or free use to begin with. So we need one of two experts here: a) a cartographer that can create free use versions of the maps. or b) someone that can tell us that these are in fact free use, not fair us. --NThurston 19:31, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

To put some more oil on this fire (I really dislike FU disputations), I have read the terms of use of The Scout Association before, in casu Baden-Powell House, and it is really clear that there is no consent of use of material from the website for any use (even Scout use) without very clear written authorization by the SA. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 21:07, 16 April 2007 (UTC).

Better for us to figure it out and police ourselves that deal with the FU police. So, Baden-Powell House is a good example. Suppose that we found out that this picture was not supposed to be on Commons because it is copyrighted, etc. In this case, even though the copyright owner had not given consent, it could be used legally under FU in an article under certain circumstances. The problem for us in Wikipedia is the "first rule." Here the policy is one step up from legal. Could someone (yes just about anyone) replace that picture with a photo they took themselves? Yep. So Wikipedia wants to avoid the fight and simply require it to be replaced with a free-license image. With regard to the maps, the information contained in the map (namely, where the boundaries are) is not copyright-able. So I could create a map of the UK (or use a free licensed one), use the information from the copyrighted image to correctly locate the Scout county and the shape of its border, and call it a free image. Will it look something like the current image? One would hope. What is the difference then? It's the fine line of legality, I suppose. --NThurston 21:24, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

You mention that "information" contained within a map is non-copyrightable. Are you completely sure about that? I was under the impression that to trace information from maps would be creating a derived work of the map, and would still be subject to the original copyright. The OpenStreetMap project certainly disagrees the notion that map information (data) cannot be copyrighted. See their FAQ. It's likely that this data is based on Ordnance Survey data (like almost every officially published map in the UK) so special provisions may apply under Crown Copyright that might not apply for most databases and information. Richard B 21:54, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

This was the argument I presented in a discussion with BigDT - there was a case in the UK where the Automobile Association had used Ordnance Survey maps to get geographical information without obtaining licence from the OS... their representation of the information is vastly different, but because they had used geo-data that OS had obtained, AA was taken to task, although the case was settled out of court.

That said - I've taken BigDT's advice, and I am now using the available free maps here, and asking the graphics boys to create new maps for those Scout Counties not adequately covered by the current collection. -- Horus Kol Talk 02:33, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm definitely not a lawyer, and know even less about UK copyright law. However, my understanding is that in this case, the information itself isn't protected. So, if I created a map showing the boundaries of my local council, and the way I knew what those boundaries are is by local at someone else's map, then I am OK. I am not allowed to "lift" their artwork, skill, etc. in the process, so tracing would definitely be out as a method for incorporating that information. I think you've done the right thing, though. --NThurston 14:09, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

The O.S. I don't think would agree - why else would they have sued the AA? They just used OS data to produce their maps. Be wary that the OS as well as many commercial maps in the UK include "trap streets" on maps - streets that don't exist (as well as kinks in rivers and potentially district/county boundaries) that if they appear on another map, must prove that it's been copied. I think it's probably important to stress that US geo-data produced by the government is public domain. UK geo-data is classed by the OS as Intellectual Property and most definitely not public domain. I think it needs to be checked carefully before we just assume that it's ok. Richard B 15:39, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I can see their point, but if SA makes a map showing that the Cumbria Scout County "is concurrent with the political county of Cumbria," it would be no different than them describing it in writing (as is done in the article). The information about the boundaries of itself is not protected. Now, what we are concerned about is how I deal with that. I could find my own public domain mapping system (software, charts, etc.) and create a map that shows this information or just draw one free hand from my vast knowledge of England's geo-political boundaries. What I can't do is trace, copy or otherwise incorporate the image itself and claim free license. The key is that the means by which I create my map must be free license. For example, if the O.S. made a map showing that something important is located at 10 Downing Street (or 11 for that matter), the information is "where does Tony live/work." I can certainly use that information to make my own map if I base my new drawing/image on original artwork, free licensed images, etc. Does that help? --NThurston 15:48, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

That does sound reasonable to me, but I'm not a lawyer either. So we'd need a source that's written down then for all counties then ;-). The OS website stakes a claim on "redrawn" maps redrawn mapping means the use within a publication of mapping that has been redrawn or compiled with reference to Ordnance Survey maps but are not exact or facsimile copies and do not look like the Ordnance Survey maps. Redrawn mapping includes mapping that has been reproduced by another publisher from Ordnance Survey material, for example, Geographers’ A-Z Map Co Ltd, Estate Publications, Philip’s and so on. So you might not be able to look at a map and use it as a reference either - even if it looks nothing like the original - and even if it's published by the Scout Association (provided they did get licensed OS data) - if you read that passage the way I did.Richard B 15:59, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

We're close to being on the same page, but not quite. As I read this quote you posted here, there is a key phrase - "with reference to." My lay opinion suggests that this refers to the underlying geo-data, not the fact that is being expressed by it. So, you would still have to find a free-license source for your underlying geo-data (political boundaries, rivers, streets, etc.) but once you have found that, you could still put a little star on top of 10 Downing Street, or shade in Cumbria county, or whatever you want. In my book, that's the key difference between the "fact" and the "map." So, using the SA description (visual or written) isn't the issue. It's that we need a free-licensed geo-data "canvas" upon which to draw that fact. --NThurston 16:12, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

May I suggest Wikipedia:Blank maps? Chris 04:39, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Totin' Chip

I was looking at this article, and wondered if it might be better served as a section of a Scoutcraft (Boy Scouts of America) article. Please leave comments at Talk:Totin' Chip -- Horus Kol Talk 06:08, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Non-free content

I noticed that a bunch of album images I had uploaded were getting the license tag changed over the weekend. Curious as to the change, it leads me to Wikipedia:Non-free content/templates.

For the purposes of consistency and automated identification, all non-free images on English Wikipedia must be directly tagged with a template that begins with the prefix "Non-free". This will enable automated tools to detect such images by matching on the wikitext for the regex "\{\{[Nn]on-free" or by consulting the templatelinks table in the database. Machine readability is required by the Wikimedia foundation licensing policy.

It would appear that this would then apply to Scoutlogo. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 17:40, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

I received this on my talkpage:

Fair use rationale for Image:Union of Brazilian Scouts logo.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Union of Brazilian Scouts logo.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 21:50, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Are they kidding? Does this mean they will now require separately written rationales on each of the 400+ Scout logos now currently in use on Wikipedia articles, which already have what they call a "boilerplate" disclaimer? Chris 22:28, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

I suppose I've been cheating a bit. The last images I've uploaded, I have done a cut and paste, essentially a boilerplate. See the talk for Image:Venturer right pocket.png. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 00:06, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Tim Jeal's biography of B-P

Has anyone got Tim Jeal's biography of B-P and could spare the time to find and write a reference? I'm told Jeal says that B-P proposed to Rose Kerr in 1905. If someone with the book would put a reference in the Rose Kerr article, it would be appreciated. Kingbird 16:45, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

How about this- [6]. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 16:55, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

I was hoping someone would volunteer a reference directly from the book. Kingbird 17:03, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Wim has a copy, I think.Rlevse 20:13, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Yep, got the book, read it three times now, and wrote the Tim Jeal article as well as the Baden-Powell (book). (Much better read, btw, than Kiernan, which I just don't seem to be able to finish). Don't these articles provide enough detail? Do you want the page number (348), you mean? Or just confirmation that B-P did propose to miss Gough (yes)? Jeal deduces that it was probably on 9 December, the date that his courting her was abruptly ended. Success with the Kerr article. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 23:28, 4 May 2007 (UTC).

Thanks, Wim. Page 348 in which edition? Kingbird 18:39, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

As far as I know, all editions have the same pagination. I used the Pimlico edition of 1991. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 20:09, 7 May 2007 (UTC).

Thank you. That's all I need. Kingbird 20:32, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Scout Hall

I found this article, it's actually an unrelated article, but isn't that what you chaps ;) call Scout meeting facilities in Britain and Australia and so on? If so, shouldn't this be a disambig page, or have something to qualify the name? Chris 11:11, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, you are right. I thought there was some discussion last year on this when someone suggested an article on Scout Den, but I can not find it now. The current article is very brief. I'm not sure what we do about this one. --Bduke 12:45, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Maybe in Australia but in UK it's Scout Hut.Biscit 12:16, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

It is Scout Hut in some places and Scout Hall in others, but we still have a problem whether we have an article on it. I think not. It should be included in other articles. --Bduke 12:29, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

ScoutingWikiProject on 21st WSJ

In about two months the 21st World Scout Jamboree will open. I'm wondering if any project members will take part? Are there questions worth checking (or tasks being done) during the WSJ? --jergen 18:35, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Participants

Please include status on WSJ (participant, troop staff, IST, contingent staff) and helpful equiment (camera, notebook, ...).

• jergen - IST from Germany - digicam (?)
• NThurston - not attending, but parent of participants & home-front support getting crew ready
• mathboy965 - Participant from USA - notebook

Questions and tasks

Please sign so that answers reach the right person.

• Official translations of NSO's names into English? --jergen

Reminder. Any wishes? --jergen 20:58, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes please! Please get a badge, a photo of a badge, or a physical description of a badge, for the newest WOSM members which joined in September 2005, Guinea and Malawi. If you can get actual badges I will trade or reimburse; if a photo or description we can have the GraphicsLab clean them up or create them. Thanks, brother! Chris 04:12, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Also, again see if you can find if maybe we have Iran mislabeled as being part of the Arab Region, when it should be A-P. Chris 04:25, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

You're back! How was it? What did you find out? :) Chris 00:05, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Stupid Bots

I've started going through these articles and fixing the FU rationale on the images beofre the bots get to them.

Alabama  • Alaska  • Arizona  • Arkansas  • California  • Colorado  • Connecticut  • Delaware  • Florida  • Georgia  • Hawaii  • Idaho  • Illinois  • Indiana  • Iowa  • Kansas  • Kentucky  • Louisiana  • Maine  • Maryland  • Massachusetts  • Michigan  • Minnesota  • Mississippi  • Missouri  • Montana  • Nebraska  • Nevada  • New Hampshire  • New Jersey  • New Mexico  • New York  • North Carolina  • North Dakota  • Ohio  • Oklahoma  • Oregon  • Pennsylvania  • Rhode Island  • South Carolina  • South Dakota  • Tennessee  • Texas  • Utah  • Vermont  • Virginia  • Washington  • West Virginia  • Wisconsin  • Wyoming

Washington, D.C. (District of Columbia)

--evrik ^(talk) 18:20, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

THank you!Rlevse 20:16, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

• No, thank you. I see you have been very active in this. --evrik ^(talk) 16:45, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

History

Does anyone know where in the Wikipedia:Archived delete debates all the articles we lost in the mass purge were listed? --evrik ^(talk) 21:15, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

• Somehow this question got lost in Rlevse's archival earlier. I'm still interested. --evrik ^(talk) 20:49, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

What articles specifically and when were they purged? If you know the names, that'd be awesome.Rlevse 22:53, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

logo request template

I have created {{reqScoutlogo}} for national Guide and Scout emblems we still lack, over 100. I haven't got all the kinks work out, but please, give it a visit. Chris 22:50, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Betacommand bot's plans

If you'd like to know what this bot is up to, see WP:AN#BetacommandBot_and_Fair_use. Rlevse 16:21, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Philly eviction

I read the wikinews article on a potential eviction of the Scouts in Philadelphia from their Scout building. As I read it, simply because city council and BSA management disagree on the (non)allowance of homosexual people to participate in Scouting. No wonder Scouting is controversial in the US. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 21:38, 14 June 2007 (UTC).

It's called political correctness and it's insanely run amok in America. Rlevse 21:43, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Or its called the government which is meant to be for all the people not encouraging discrimination against some of its people on grounds of religion or sexual orientation by subsidizing organizations that discriminate on those grounds. Note the Philly Scouts like the Sea Scouts in Berkeley will probably be able to pay the standard rate and stay. In either case this argument does not belong on the talk pages of wikipedia. I would look at http://www.religioustolerance.org/bsa.htm which contains an overview and links to multiple sides in the controversy.--Erp 00:53, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Also known as one person's rights outweighing the rights of 99 people's rights.Rlevse 01:33, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Girl Guides - dab or stub?

Some days ago I modified Girl Guides from a Wikipedia:Disambiguation to a Wikipedia:Stub. In the weeks before two users changed all links linking to Girl Guides to any of the mentioned meanings - in both cases with little knowledge of the subject.

Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links states that dab pages should not be linked to and that links should go directly to the appropriate article. This is executed by the project mentioned on Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links - with about 330 pages linking to Girl Guides it was one of the Top 10 linked dab pages. When I came upon this project I decided to change Girl Guides to a stub-like article, thus preventing changes on pages linking it.

Rlevse asked me to discuss this change within the project (cf. User talk:Jergen#Girl Guides 2). As far as I can see there are two possibilities for the future status of Girl Guides:

• Disambiguation. This means that all pages linking it must be changed to the matching article; sometimes this may be more than one articles.
• Stub/article. Then the article needs further content and it would surely repeat partly the contents of Scouting.

Comments? --jergen 16:56, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

The same issue exists with Boy Scouts, just fewer articles link directly to it and we'd have to change our written policy (see chart) at the top of this page. Rlevse 17:15, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Boy Scouts has only two article links - but we should clean up the links to Boy Scout. Many pages linking it do not refer to the section but to the movement or a national organisation (mostly the BSA). --jergen 17:32, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

I wish I could give some insight on this-if the policy is that you cannot link to a disambig, then external editors will keep misrouting our links, so it is better to at least have a stub or article, even if most of it is copies and modified to feminine from masculine. Chris 05:10, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

I can see both sides to this. I'd like more input.Rlevse 11:07, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

• I say {{disambig}} --evrik ^(talk) 20:08, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

  So you are going to check and fix the 330 links? --jergen 06:46, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

• Nope. But maybe we can get the page protected? --evrik ^(talk) 18:06, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
  • That is not the purpose of page protection.Rlevse 20:13, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
    • There has been plenty of time for input on this, we should leave it as Jergen suggests, except I made Girl Guide and Girl Scout redirect to Girl Guide and Girl Scout, following our pattern of the singular being about the individual youth, not the organization, which still leaves Girl Guides as a stub.Rlevse 23:36, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

      I agree, but am not totally happy with changing the redirects: Articles linking Girl Scout or Girl Guide usually refer to the worldwide movement or to a national organization. (BTW: It's the same with Boy Scouts.) It would be easier, if these redirects linked to Girl Guides and were checked once every two months. --jergen 19:19, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Scout troop

Sister and brother Scouts and Scouters- I made Scout troop a separate article, as

a) it was buried in "troop", and doesn't need to be something one hunts for past military and state patrols, and

b) I did not put it in BSA as it is not strictly relegated to the United States. Each country has troops, and my hope is to expand the article to include structures from different countries, and different outlooks, be it "troop", "troup", "otryad"...; male, female or co-ed; with or without patrols...

Please will you give the article a look and add specifics, differences or facts from your own country of organization?

Thanks, yours in Scouting, Chris 06:19, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

I have given it a clean up. --Egel _Reaction? 11:20, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Weird question

Hi folks, I just thought of a weird one-is WOSM as an acronym ever pronounced as a word, like NASA is often said NAS-uh? Or is it always said W-O-S-M, like U-S-A? Chris 05:27, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

In The Netherlands it is pronounced as a word, otherwise the SM sounds too much like Sadism and Masochism. WAGGGS is pronounced as a word too.--Egel _Reaction? 07:46, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

The same in German - and if each letter of WAGGGS was pronounced, everybody had to count the Gs... --jergen 08:00, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

In America, yes to both, they sound like WOZ-UM and WAGS. Rlevse 12:04, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Kudos to Graphics Lab

Sisters and Brothers, The folks at Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Images to improve are doing something huge to preserve the history of some of the smaller, dormant or banned Scout organizations. Whoever issues barnstars, can we give these great friends a Scouting barnstar for their work? Chris 05:03, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

done.Rlevse 12:06, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedians who survived Philmont

This is up for deletion. It is not an article so I brought it here. The discussion is at Wikipedia:User categories for discussion#Category:Wikipedians who survived Philmont. --Bduke 09:39, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Just relaised that Category:Wikipedians who survived ROCS is there too. --Bduke 09:39, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Request for modification to the {{Scoutlogo}} template

I would ask that we make a modification to the template, for defunct or out-of-copyright Scouting insignia-those being worked on at Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Images to improve are between 20 and 45 years out of use, so they may actually not have copyright holders any longer, but the issue is raised of need. Chris 21:59, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Nthurston is our template coding expert. Wim is very good too.Rlevse 23:07, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words, Randy. I however would like to approach this issue from a different angle: if a picture is free from copyright, it should be tagged as such, e.g., as public domain, and not as (non-free scout logo), which is by definition non-free. Why would you want to put a {{scoutlogo}} tag on it at all: that isn't applicable anymore then. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 20:08, 2 July 2007 (UTC).

Good point.Rlevse 20:22, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, the thing is, it may be defunct but may not yet be copyright free. All I am saying is, like there are the BSA subsections, there should be an extra section for emblems that are not now in use. Chris 22:01, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I'm probably not seeing 'it': what is the subsection that you'd like to see, then? 'defunct'? 'not-yet-free'? notinuse? And what should the resulting distinction from the standard template then be? Wim van Dorst (Talk) 23:04, 2 July 2007 (UTC).

Something that would change the wording in use to something like "This is an emblem or logo for a Scout association that no longer exists or is dormant, but is useful for Wikipedia for historical purposes. The copyright may or may not still be valid." Chris 05:12, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Aha, now I think I understand your request. But the point is that {{scoutlogo}} is a copyright tag, and whether an organization has disappeared or become dormant or whether the said logo is not any longer in use, does not change the copyright at all. On the contrary: copyrights are explicitly stated to remain valid under such conditions. At the end of organizations, rights of all kinds (property, copyrights, etc) don't disappear but get move to a person or other organization. This is murky waters indeed. At least for copyright by persons, death is a clear moment in time to start counting up to 2.2 billion seconds. Bottomline is that I therefore think is not appropriate to change the copyright tag. I propose that the current state of the owner of the copyright can be described in the running text of the image. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 12:39, 8 July 2007 (UTC).

I think Wim has it. The preference is to use {{Non-free media rationale}} in the image description; this information could be place under the Other information field. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 18:01, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Vietnamese Wikipedia on Scouting

User:Motthoangwehuong has done a great job tripling the size of our article on Scouting in Vietnam, and is singlehandedly writing the Scout articles on the Vietnamese Wikipedia, thus far he has done the Scout Law, Scout Handbook, WOSM, BP, reef knot, and articles on VN Scouting both in-country and in-exile! Chris 06:11, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, excellent improvement. I raised it to a B-class, but it still needs clean up.Rlevse 10:58, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Weird fact

Okay, I'm going through and describing the details on each national Scout and Guide emblem. The most common theme? Palm trees. I have counted at least a dozen. Sleep well. ;) Chris 06:29, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Robert Baden-Powell, 1st Baron Baden-Powell as August 1's TFA

I've just added Robert Baden-Powell, 1st Baron Baden-Powell to the Today's features article Date requests for August 1, that being the same day as the first Scout Camp, since it was already in the general queue. It'll need support to solidify being put up then, so if you want to see Baden-Powell on the front page on August 1st, go over and voice your opinion. JQF • Talk • Contribs 20:51, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Asociación de Guías Scouts de Bolivia

For some reason the coding on this one infobox will not accept the graphic, can someone help? Chris 18:24, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. JQF • Talk • Contribs 14:46, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Chris 21:28, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

This same coding problem is happening at Asociación de Muchachas Guías de Panamá. Chris 06:09, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. --jergen 08:41, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Not sure where this is best placed...

...but Baden-Powell Award is currently in disastrous shape, and being associated with this group (As far as I can tell), I wanted to give some notice of this. Also, it's not linked any where... Thanx, 68.39.174.238 17:13, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks- checking 'what links here' helped me to place it. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 17:25, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Brownsea Island Scout camp as TFA for August 2nd?

Seeing as Baden Powell is being requested to be a TFA for August 1st, and the recently FAed Brownsea Island Scout camp has be forwarded as a possible alternate choice, I say why not try the second for August 2nd, as the first camp (which will be on it's hundredth anniversary) was from August 1-8. It'll need a request blurb first, but that shouldn't be a big issue. The next question is are there any other FA status we should try to have put up after that. The first two that come to mind are the Wood Badge and the Baden-Powell House articles, both of which are current FAs. What do people think? JQF • Talk • Contribs 23:08, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Done.Rlevse 23:14, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok, it's an official request now, for any day August 1-8 after Baden Powell, with a preference for August 8 to mark the last day of the first scout camp. It'll need support, so if you want to see it TFA , go give it your support. JQF • Talk • Contribs 15:51, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Non-free Scoutlogo

As many of you may have noticed, a bot started editing images, changing the Scoutlogo template to Non-free Scoutlogo. This broke the category system. Rlevse simply moved Scoutlogo to Non-free Scoutlogo, so hopefully this nonsense will stop. I have updated WPS:IMAGE to reflect the new template. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 13:17, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Will we need to go in and manually change each? Chris 20:01, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes. The bot did not account for templates that use parameters, so the BSA images bumped up to the Scouting logo cat and it added non-existent cats based on the parameter. Randy and I have cleaned up all but 43 images left in Category:BSAC (click on this to open it as an edit). We still need to go back and apply the template to the images in Category:Scouting logos, as it removed the template and replaced it with the category. I do believe we need the template back, as I would not be surprised if the categories need to be renamed. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 20:27, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Category:Eagle Scouts

I have nominated Category:Eagle Scouts and one of its subcategories for listifying and deletion. I am absolutely certain that people here will disagree, but I thought that I would notify this WikiProject anyway. (This really could be handled in a list much better, with dates, references, and other information.) Dr. Submillimeter 13:57, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your courtesy. I think the list that you have in mind already exists as List of Eagle Scouts (Boy Scouts of America). Kingbird 16:19, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

It shouldn't be deleted, but that's another story.Rlevse 16:22, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I also noted on the CfD that the Fictional Eagle Scout cat can go as well since it is already on Scouting in popular culture. Might as well clear it all out. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 20:11, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

What's really interesting is that they think this is not worthy of a cat, but all those "year of birth/death" cats are more significant.Rlevse 20:15, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Raging debate at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 July 20 Rlevse 01:51, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Hmm. Interesting. See my comment there.Sumoeagle179 01:52, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

pdf file to text

Does anyone know how if at all it is possible to convert a pdf file to its textual component? Thanks! Chris 05:48, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes it is possible, when there is text in in the pdf, but some pdf's are just a set of pictures. Search for pdftohtml, pdf2html, pdftotxt, pdf2word etc. I know this one works: http://sourceforge.net/projects/pdftohtml/ --Egel _Reaction? 07:34, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

I have Acrobat Pro 8.0 at work. Let me know if I can help with something specific. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 11:22, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

I found a series of pdf files that have each Guide Motto in multiple languages, with all the diacritical marks in the right locations, which will save hours of typing and making sure we don't make typos. This information is both published by WAGGGS and public domain without copyright. Chris 21:30, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

If it is online, or you can email it to me, I can work on it next week. I'm Scouting this weekend! --Gadget850 ( Ed) 22:35, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, e-mailed you them! :) Chris 21:35, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Scout logo template, fairuse, etc

After six days of work using AWB, I've now gone through the Scout logos category fixing the mess that bot made (see item 2 under announcements), adding fair use rationales since I was in that cat anyway, and generally fixing up things. There are 740+ images in it. PLus there was the day Gadget850 and I fixed the subcats with all the BSA images, an additional few hundred. I'm sure I made mistakes (like putting less than 300px vice greater than), but things are in far better shape. I found two BSA images missing the BSA options, DOZENS of images missing the GGGS-task-force tag, etc. Several images need better sources, for some I just had to put "website", which won't cut it, but things are much better and the bots shouldn't be giving us as much headaches, esp if we use the FUR template Gadget850 has worked on. See his neat updates to our Manual of Style.Rlevse 10:27, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Until the next thing the bots and their non-Scout-but-know-better-than-us-somehow masters find some fresh horror to plague us with... Chris 21:27, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Really, GEEZ, the image, cat and bot cabalists will drive everyone off wiki before long.Rlevse 21:59, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

{{Non-free media rationale}} has been moved to {{Non-free use rationale}} to make the name shorter. I guess we now call it Non-FUR. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 21:19, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

??Doesn't that only save two characters? Rlevse 22:09, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

B-P on Main Page

B-P's article will be one the Main Page on 1 Aug, the 100th annivesary of Scouting (see announcement section). The Brownsea article didn't get selected for any day of the anniversary week, which I expected as they don't like related topics close in time on the main page. But happy the founder of the world's largest youth movement made it on the anniversary date. It will assuredly be heavily vandalized. I suggest just letting it run and when it is over, review for good edits and revert the rest. Rlevse 15:30, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Hey gang, I know I've been away for quite some time, but I would like to congradulate everyone who helped to make the BP page into a featured article! It also looks like there has been a heck of a lot of progress in the Scouting Wikiproject as a whole. Good job to all of you! --Naha|^(talk) 15:26, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Scout Motto redux, please help clean up before I add the table

Hi folks, please check out Talk:Scout Motto, there was no structure to the original list, so I made it a table. I just can't figure out what to do with Esperanto (Estu preta), Interlingua (Sempre Preste), and Uighur (Tayyar Bol). Should a "language" column be added, maybe right after country? Chris 07:45, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi again, I am trying (and not yet successful) to incorporate a faded text for languages we still don't have. There is a table at the article Wallis and Futuna which uses the text style="color:#aaaaaa;" to make the parts of the box that still need inclusion a light grey, like most software that when you get to a function you can't use at that moment, it disables the dropdown but still allows it to be seen. Can anyone help with the coding? Chris 23:08, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

You mean like what I just tried? Rlevse 23:24, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Randy! What I mean is not where the box itself is greyed out, just so the request please add x language variant shows up in pale grey. Chris 23:31, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't see the phrase please add x language variant anywhere in the table. Put it somewhere so we know what you're talking about.Rlevse 23:59, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for being unclear-x simply represents the distinct name of the language-follow the American Samoa row across and you will see it. Chris 00:11, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

You should have said it was commented out in the code, not visible in the table in a browser.Rlevse 00:24, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

I did already apologize for being unclear. Your new edit is closer, but the box color needs to stay the same as all others, only the text in the box should be faint grey, not red. Thanks! Chris 00:51, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Got it figured out, thanks for pointing me in the right direction! Chris 02:06, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Would you all take a look at it, as it is now? If there are no objections, I will move it into article space. With the exception of a couple, all the languages lacking are not widely spoken and would take forever, though I have put requests at each language page, national page, project page, and where I can find native speakers. Chris 09:55, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

GGGS Request

Anyone that has a copy of Trefoil Round the World, please fill in the Girl Guide and Girl Scout histories, as many of them are stubs. Chris 04:23, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Scouting 2007 Centenary

I have 18 photos of Tidewater’s “Sunrise of Scouting” ceremony, which celebrated the 100th anniversary of Scouting. This was done at 8am local time all over the world today. Aug 1, 1907 was when Baden-Powell began the first Scout campout at Brownsea Island, England.

They are on my flickr site here

and on wikicommons here

Feel free to pass this on and use the photos for Scouting purposes if you like. Rlevse 18:04, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

please help

Administrator's Commons have delete image: Image:Olave St Clair Soames.jpg, please help me I'dont speak englishSzumyk 08:51, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I've got our image expert looking into it.Rlevse 10:01, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Looks hopeless, but our image expert just found us a free one and I just put it on commons and changed the article.Rlevse 21:25, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Scouting in Spain

Okay, so the deletionists destroyed the worldwide gallery of Scout and Guide emblems, so I have made smaller, country specific galleries for national articles. Now they're saying we can't have them on the country specific ones? Someone has to put a stop to this madness. Chris 06:29, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

That's a victim of the long ongoing debate on one's definition of "replaceable". I don't like it either but as you know those who think if you're alive and in jail in deepest Tibet, you're photo can be easily obtained and hence a non-free image of you is "easily replaceable" now have the upper hand.Rlevse 10:49, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

The issue with Scouting in Spain is not replaceability, it is the use of non-free images in a gallery. The policy here is Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria (NFCC). As I see it, there are several issues with such a gallery in that article. The appropriate NFCC references in question here are:

• 3(a) Minimal use. As little non-free content as possible is used in an article
• 8 Significance. Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic

The images in question were the seven emblems of the Scouting associations in Spain, placed in a gallery at the end of the article. The real question, is how does the *gallery* enhance the article? In my opinion, it does nothing to aid the reader in understanding the subject.

Now- each image would be perfectly acceptable to illustrate the articles for each association. A problem here is that you don't have those articles yet, and per NFCC 7 (One-article minimum), those orphaned images are going to be deleted. One fix for that would be to start stubs for each article and include the image so it does not get deleted; else you will have to upload it again when you do get to that article. You could even write an article on "Emblems of Spanish Scouting associations" where you describe the meaning of each emblem. But, you simply cannot use non-free images in a gallery.

Now, I will defer to B here, but I have been following much of his work lately and I think I have a pretty good sense of how this works. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 16:15, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

The user who deleted it said in his summary his reason was number 8, which is replacability. I'm glad you and B understand this stuff because I only have the most basic grasp of the image rules and complexities.Rlevse 16:36, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

I will put this in my dispute at that article as well-it's the same reason we put the coat-of-arms on each national article, or every coin in a series on national money pages-the images themselves tell a non-verbal story, about what the Scouts say about themselves. The emblems are every bit as important to the topic as anything else. That's the same reason we have heraldry, even today's corporate branding-the visual depiction that represents a group has all sorts of nested meanings that can't simply be physically described. Chris 18:27, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

That is quite true, to a point. The root problem in Scouting in Spain is that just having those images in a gallery at the end of the article does nothing to enhance the article in and of itself. You need to clearly tie each image to the text of the article in some manner; this would apply even to free images. As it is, it appears that they are in the article purely for decoration. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 15:00, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Point well taken, and in total agreement. The problem was, in each of the national articles, when we _did_ previously have the images married to the individual orgs, for countries where there is more than one org, we were accused of using the images for decoration at that point, but told that a small gallery would be acceptable. We need to come up with a bit in the MoS for this. Chris 18:43, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

That makes no sense to me; can you point me to the talk on that? --Gadget850 ( Ed) 18:53, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I wish I could remember where that is parked, as it didn't make any sense to me either, seeing as the larger gallery was deleted. Essentially the gist was, I asked the rabid deletionists, in what form they would leave the images alone, and I was told that a gallery was more acceptable than putting the logos adjacent to the org name in multiple listings. Chris 19:17, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

templates and Scouting WP:MoS

User JQF keeps changing the formatting of Template:InteramericanScout. I understand wanting to align this template with Wiki formats, but I am reverting it again and will keep reverting it, as we specifically made this and related templates to match other Scout boxes, rather than some generic Wiki navbox template. The regional boxes at Category:WikiProject Scouting templates are not meant to be left-justified, or collapsible, to be tucked out-of-the-way, they are not clutter in an article, but part of it. Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Templates doesn't say anything one way or another, but I propose we keep them all the same way, for consistency sake. Chris 07:45, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

The Scouting templates need to be consistent, whatever form that takes, don't change them at all or change all of them. If this becomes more of an issue, it needs to be discussed first. As for the tweaks Jergen made, please have done to all templates in that group.Rlevse

I agree. If we need changes to Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Templates, then please do so, or discuss it on that talk page. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 14:54, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

mergefrom WikiProject Philmont Scout Ranch

As WikiProject Philmont Scout Ranch seems to have been inactive since the turn of the year, I propose making it a taskforce of this project, similar to the Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Girl Guiding and Girl Scouting task force. That will ensure it won't get deleted (the WP:Council has been cleaning out inactive projects in recent months) and it will standardize that project with our existing MoS and membership base. Chris 07:51, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

That seems sensible if it is inactive. You are right that htere is a purge on inactive Projects. --Bduke 08:33, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

I have always considered a subproject of us. I think the task force is a good idea,but I don't know the mechanics of deleting/purging a project. They were very inactive last year too.Rlevse 11:06, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Probably the easiest way would be to set up the task force, notify all editors involved with the project and then put the project to MfD for deletion. The talk page (where incidently I see someone has just replied to a post on 20 December 2005!) could be added to the Scouting Project talk archives. I see nothing on the Philmont Project page that is transcluded except for templates and userboxes. The content would largely be moved to the task force page. --Bduke 11:15, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Instead of a deletion MfD, could the participants not simply be notified, and then move Wikipedia:WikiProject Philmont Scout Ranch into the space Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Philmont Scout Ranch task force? That would keep the edit and move history intact. Chris 19:42, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

I have now notified all six listed members, of which, only JohnTex still seems active. I have directed them to this talk. I think it would not be unreasonable to be bold and move this ourselves after a bit of time. Chris 20:21, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Agree. I think a move would be appropriate. --Bduke 22:41, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

I think that's a good idea. DarthGriz98 23:11, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Another good idea, i'd say go ahead and be bold. Since the vast majority of the participants appear to be inactive, why don't we save the project before it is deleted.-MBK004 23:20, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

I would tend to agree with that, but merging a project, albeit a defunct one, is a major change, so I think we should wait at least a day or two.Rlevse 23:39, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

It's probably best to wait a few days, as you said; but, if none of the listed members are active, there shouldn't be any problems with a unilateral move. Kirill 00:13, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I think the change would be a good idea. Zybthranger 01:10, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Everyone agrees, so I'm working on this. Chris' idea of just moving the pages and putting the templates and userboxes in with ours is the best.Rlevse 01:26, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm mostly done. See note on announcement section. I asked Gadget850 to incorporate their boxes and templates and Chris to notify project people. Let me know if I missed something.Rlevse 02:06, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

I double checked- I had already included the Philmont templates and userboxes in WPS:TEMP and WPS:USER. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 02:56, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

I've notified five-including L1am who became user:Leki, and skipped JohnTex, who I am sure by now knows of the move. ;) Chris 07:35, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Template moved from talk pages. — Rebelguys2 ^talk 07:36, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Philmont task force coordinator

Hello, Rlevse asked me if I would be interested in being the coordinator of the Philmont Scout Ranch. I am honored and I would be happy to do it if that is OK with everyone.

My qualifications:

Long-time Scouter

Multiple Philmont treks

Active Wikipedian (2+ years editing, 16,000+ edits, admin bit, one FA)

My anti-qualifications (reasons why someone else may do better than I)

I sometimes have to take unexpected wiki-breaks

Even when I'm on Wikipedia I have a lot of interests so I go off in lots of directions.

I feel like I've contributed some to the Philmont articles but I can't say I've dived into them with two feet.

If selected I will do my best. Johntex\^talk 02:16, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

• Support. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 02:54, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
• Support Chris 03:01, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
• Support. DarthGriz98 03:05, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
• Support. Doing your best is all anyone can expect.Rlevse 09:59, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
• Support. Zybthranger 21:30, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
• Support. -MBK004 21:33, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
• Support. Kingbird 21:39, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
• File:Crystal Clear app katuberling.png Now you are going to have to do a "disclosure" on the next CfD. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 18:16, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Rules and standards

Arising from the MfD debate about Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Merging, moving and deleting articles, I propose the following changes to names of and in some of our sub-pages:

• Rename Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/RulesStandards to Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Project editing conventions.
• Change the link to the above in the main info box from "Manual of style" to "Project editing conventions".
• Change the first header of the the above from "WikiProject Scouting Conventions and Guidelines" to "WikiProject Scouting editing conventions".
• Change "WikiProject Scouting Conventions and Guidelines" in the green background box to "WikiProject Scouting editing conventions".

I think I have them all, but you get the point. I believe this will satisfy the concerns raised by that MfD proposal and also that they are indeed better and clearer.--Bduke 23:01, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

I can live with this. OK by me.Rlevse 23:48, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

OK by me. I will take this on, but will wait a day or so to gain consensus. This was where I was trying to go, but I don't think the headers were really his hot button. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 00:07, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree about waiting a day or two. --Bduke 00:12, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Looks good to me, and I'd additionally recommend moving that text to a template. Sticking the same header on a dozen pages looks like a template job. >Radiant< 08:20, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I propose that we go ahead at once and make these changes as User:Radiant! is happy and will close the MfD. Do you want me to do it or can you do it, Ed), as you are very familiar with where everything is? I'm happy to assist. --Bduke 09:43, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Ed, Brian, Randy, you guys are gentlemen and I applaud your cool heads. I sit at the feet of the masters. I have to, else I'll never make it when I finally get to Japan. ;) Chris 09:48, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Proposal: If an admin does it, it'll preserve the page histories and such. So my proposal is to let Bduke do it as his first admin job since he's a BRAND NEW ADMIN. See my tools notes here for help: User:Rlevse/Tools and always feel free to ask for help.Rlevse 10:05, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

What step needs an admin? The only step that is not an edit is the first. That is a move, which anyone can do. When I'm clear that I am not mising something, I'll start the process, but I may not get it all done. I'm going to be busy in the next three days. It is eveing here (9.00 p.m.). Tomorrow my wife returns from an overseas trip around noon. Over the weekend I am working on a stall at the museum for Science Week. I may have to leave the rest for Ed. --Bduke 11:13, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

OK, I goofed that one.;)Rlevse 12:46, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

What move- I must have missed something here. I can do the template pretty quickly. I will be out on vacation from this weekend through next week, so my activity will be limited. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 11:46, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Point 1: Rename Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/RulesStandards to Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Project editing conventions. That is a move. If you could do the template and add it to the page we have just been fighting over, I'll then add it to others. --Bduke 12:08, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I've done points 2 and 3, but not the actual links in point 3 that need point 1 doing first. --Bduke 12:08, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I have done the move in point 1 and corrected what became redirects in point 3. I think I have caught all the substantive redirects (not in talk pages etc.). I see Ed has done the template. We just need to check it is in place. I'll do that tomorrow. Must go to bed. --Bduke 13:25, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

{{ScoutConventions}} is now up. I included a shortcut parameter, but since the shortcuts are going away, I need to figure out how to use it. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 13:20, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

BTW- the template places the page in Category:WikiProject Scouting templates. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 13:49, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Look at WP:MILHIST and how they did shortcuts. They are WP:... and seem to point to similar items as ours, but maybe no one has discovered them yet and rfd'd them.Rlevse 13:25, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes- I saw that and have been considering it, but they have a single page of "guidelines." BTW- I just noted that we are not the only project with multipage guides. I really want to figure this, as I uses the shortcuts daily. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 13:49, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Got it. It appears my usage of "WPS:" was outside the pale. I'm going to go with "WP:S-" and use the same shortcut names. If I had understood, I would have simply moved the shortcuts and put the old ones up for speedy RfD. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 14:30, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

MILHIST actually has multiple pages, you just have to click on links in that main page. And yes, others do too as you said.Rlevse 14:46, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

OK, new messagebox template, new shortcuts and WP:S-EDT all updated. If anyone has issues with the shortcuts, we can add more. I also moved moved Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Fair use rationale to Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Non-free media rationale. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 19:01, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

It is all looking good. Well done, Ed. You have left me nothing to do this morning! I had not noticed the RfD at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion#WPS: until late yesterday. My opinion on the redirects is that we have too many. I would prefer we only had them for the links that would be widely used. For the others people are likely to go there via WP:S-EDT, so really only that one is needed, but I will not press the point. --Bduke 22:50, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

True- I might have gotten a bit overzealous on shortcuts. I use the ref and cite page, the image page and the non-free rationale frequently, and the userbox and template pages occasionally. I just remembered to add the new template to the list. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 23:07, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your time. >Radiant< 09:50, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Brownies

Can someone (a admin?) take a look at Brownie (Girl Guides), User:WOBBLEMAN (and User:88.108.95.228) is trying to make a mess out of it. --Egel _Reaction? 11:10, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Took me a moment to see the problem. WOBBLEMAN simply created a new page Brownie (Girl and Boy Guides)) and redirected Brownie (Girl Guides) to it, thus loosing the edit history. If anything, it should have been properly moved to Brownie (Scouting). There does seem to been some edit squabbling there as well; this seems like a bad faith redirect, but it could just be ignorance of methods. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 11:20, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Are there any Brownie groups with boys?Rlevse 18:06, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, there are; eg in Belgium, Brazil, Cyprus, Germany and Greece. --jergen 18:31, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

In the Netherlands are Brownie-sections with boys, but maybe 1 boy on 100 girls. I don't think it is much different in other counties except in some co-ed WAGGGS-only organisations like Greece, Argentia or Brazil. Brownies is basicly a girly thing, there are far less boy Brownies then there are girl Cubs. --Egel _Reaction? 19:18, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Between several of us I think we've cleaned this up. Rlevse 18:12, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Just as a curiosity, in AGESCI there can be boy Brownies, but there aren't many.

--Lou Crazy 22:40, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject_Scouting/Assessment#Importance_scale

A lot of our new BSA bios (thanks for those) are being rated a high when by our own standards they rate no more than a mid. Please remember that while BSA is a big dog, it is not the only big dog on the block, and that most of these folks do not have notability outside a single Scout organization, and are not any more notable than characters elsewhere. Chris 02:40, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Feel free to change them.Rlevse 02:43, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Infobox option

Per Chris' request, the project template now has a "needs infobox" option. To add it just add "|needs-infobox=yes" to the template on an article's talk page.Rlevse 10:55, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

This will add the article to the new Category:Scouting articles needing an infobox cat.Rlevse 10:59, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! I tried it, it doesn't generate an "attention" tag or categorization or anything like that, can that be fixed? Chris 02:09, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Your probably had a typo. See sample that works here: User:Rlevse/sandbox.Rlevse 02:13, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Ah, yeah, I was missing the hyphen. I need to learn to read the whole sente... ;) Chris 02:25, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Scout bio infobox thought

Okay, now that I am thinking about it, would a Scout bio infobox, something like {{Infobox Military Person}} be worthwhile? Chris 02:32, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

What do we need that is not in {{Infobox Person}}? --Gadget850 ( Ed) 11:23, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure that the "Known for known_for" parameter is enough to cover what we would use it for. Someone could be founder of a Scout camp, hold multiple offices and awards, and in turn be presented some award by the Queen herself, which would require more parameters. I don't specifically know. It's like the world Scouting infobox-we started not really knowing what we needed, but built as the need showed itself. Anyway it was just a thought and I wanted to see what others thought. I'm not saying we need infobox creep or admin paranoia or whatever it was called last week, just my 23,780 lira. Chris 02:05, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

No that was a serious question- what DO we need? --Gadget850 ( Ed) 16:56, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm still thinking about this, haven't forgotten. Chris 07:07, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Notice of complaint

A complaint has been filed in regards to a BSA related mediation cabal case. The complainant apparently wishes to re-open the mediation cabal case as well. Johntex\^talk 21:17, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

The mediation was closed 10 months ago. If he had a problem with you, he should have brought it up then, not almost a year later.Rlevse 22:16, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, that would be my thinking as well. I just wanted the project members to be aware of the situation. Other WP:Scouting members were also party to the mediation attempt. Johntex\^talk 00:36, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

You guys know I'm generally willing to discuss things, but I simply cannot fathom the point of his latest addition to the BSA article. If he adds it again, my opinion is to delete it and take it to arb for disruption. It needs to be deleted since it does pretty much state that a living person is a liar. Whatever we do, please do not be uncivil. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 00:48, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Should there not be a statute of limitations? If you look here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Heqwm this editor hasn't been on for near a year. At the very least, his addition is in the wrong article anyway. Chris 01:59, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Last update before the discussion was archived. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 20:01, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

It is in permanent archive 289, Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive289#Johntex.27s_dishonesty_.28BSA.29 hereRlevse 20:29, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

sv:Wikipedia:Projekt scouting

A user has just added the Swedish twin to our project, did we not used to have links for the French and German projects as well, on the mainpage? Chris 21:36, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Yep, must have been lost in some edit. I'll look in the histories. Or maybe that was the portal.Rlevse 21:39, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

found them already, reposted.Rlevse 21:41, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Turns out the others were not linked to each other, so I have done it. Chris 09:05, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Linguists?

I was just thinking, just as we list who among us is an admin or good at graphics and legalities and so on, perhaps we should list who is fluent in other languages, if there is information to be translated. I know many of our European brothers and sisters are multilingual, should we list that for translation help? Chris 22:16, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Not a bad idea. Where should be put this? On a separate page or what?Rlevse 00:01, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

My first thought was on the mainpage, I don't want to get it buried, nor cause "advinistrative creep", whatever that was. The section you have as "Goals and Scope" was where I was seeing-you see where there's "Coordinators", then under that is "Scouting WikiProject members who are Wikipedia Admins", perhaps under that should be "Resources" or something. I don't know how you want to word it. It may be a good idea, or it may get buried, to put it next to members' names at Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Members, using (in Japanese) and so forth. Chris 00:15, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Thus far I have

• Anakmadiun – (Indonesian)
• Egel – (Dutch)
• IngaAusa – (Icelandic)
• Jergen – (German)
• Mang kiko – (Tagalog)
• J.Mayooresan – (Tamil)
• Motthoangwehuong – (Vietnamese)
• Wim van Dorst – (Dutch)
• Yarko – (Ukrainian)

but I think it should be somewhere in a separate place (I suggest the mainpage as before) as it gets buried in the list of members. Also, do we have any French-speakers? Chris 20:40, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

I put it in its own section on the members page and forced a TOC. Let's try that.Rlevse 11:53, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

I can help with German to some extent if needed.--The Founders Intent 01:16, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Sucession box template

I just created {{tl|S-Scout}} {{S-npo}} for use with succession boxes. Currently, it only supports Scouting, Boy Scouts of America and Girl Scouts of the USA headers, but it is quite simple to add more. An example:

--Gadget850 ( Ed) 20:44, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Due to an improper formatting (using an upper-cased S in scouting) and previous demand for a non-profit organization header, I have moved this template to a new Template:s-npo (non-profit organization) as one of its parameters. It acts in exactly the same manner as above but instead of typing s-Scouts you type s-npo followed by the same parameters. If a new scouting organization is necessary, add it to the list. Please note that if it is not a non-profit organization, then scouting is either a governmental or military office and should have either s-gov or s-mil. Thank you!
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 23:41, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Infobox WorldScouting

I added a website field to {{Infobox WorldScouting}}; this is intended for official websites only. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 16:33, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Cool idea. Yes, official only, otherwise it'll become a quagmire.Rlevse 22:21, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Scout Knots

All, I have created images of all of the official BSA knots that I know of. As these are public domain, these may be of benefit to articles, users pages, etc. Feel free to view the Scout Knots page on my users page to see what I have. RobHoitt 16:32, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Great! To me, they look different enough from the official knots that they can be used in non-articlespace areas. We already have most of the knots along with the medals and badges in Advancement and recognition in the Boy Scouts of America. I'm going to make some specific comments on the talk page. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 17:19, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

That's a great load of work on your part, Rob! They should be used in Square knot (emblem or insignia)! Chris 18:27, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Scoutopedia?

Didn't there used to be a Scouting thing on Wikia, or similar to http://www.scoutopedia.net/w/Accueil ? Chris 18:42, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

There's a Scout wiki I think. Ask B about it.Rlevse 19:15, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Better ask me. There is a Scoutwiki "hub" at http://www.scoutwiki.org/ The Finsh, French and Dutch are very active. ( I'm one of the admins of the Dutch www.scoutpedia.nl ) --Egel _Reaction? 19:45, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Wow, there's way more Scout articles in Dutch and Finnish than English? How did that happen? Chris 20:06, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

en.scoutwiki is at the moment more or less a dump of interesting Scouting pages from en.wikipedia, it is not actively mantained. It is at the moment planned to be used as a way to make translation possible between the other languages. But if a native english-writer wants to mantain it, it can become a wiki at it own. And articles about groups are alowed. --Egel _Reaction? 22:21, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

The Scouting Wikia moved to ScoutWiki. MeritBadge.org switched to wiki format, as did Scouting the Net. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 20:14, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Based on the similar format, are they all somehow tied in to Wikipedia? Chris 20:35, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

ScoutWiki and MertiBadge.org all use the MediaWiki software- see that little icon at the very bottom right of this page? Scouting the Net uses PMWiki software. Click on that icon for more info, search for "sites" for a list of site using it. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 20:53, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

article ticker?

It might be informative, now that I've seen where Egel sent me (thank you!), to have a counter going of how many Scouting articles we do have (at least those we know of), if that is possible, like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Statistics . Just my 842 drachma. Chris 07:05, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Something like the chart at Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Assessment? --Gadget850 ( Ed) 10:47, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

You are the man, I totally missed that. :} Chris 21:33, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Scout camps

The page Category:Local council camps (Boy Scouts of America) says that this wikiproject wants to have pages solely for states, with councils and camps merged in. Then why are there still articles on camps? If I wish to write about a camp (or more), where should I write about it? Etc., etc. Thanks. —ScouterSig 17:24, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

That debate comes and goes. That is why some are merged and some not. See also the RulesStandards pages (not sure where it is after Gadget850 reorganized though).Rlevse 18:26, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Per WP:S-BSA: "Editors are encouraged to use a top-down approach; to expand high level articles to the point where they can be split into smaller articles of good quality. Thus, a state article may beget a council article that begets a camp article." We should update the cat page with a link to the guideline. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 18:56, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps we need to change the text on the relevant category pages to:

Please refer to WP:S-BSA for project guidelines on notability and layout for BSA articles at the council level and below.

sounds good, pls do so.Rlevse 15:13, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Updated:

• Category:Boy Scouts of America local units
• Category:Boy Scouts of America Local Councils
• Category:Local council camps (Boy Scouts of America)

--Gadget850 ( Ed) 15:59, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

BSA categories

While looking at the preceding, I have noted that the BSA category naming is not consistent:

Boy Scouts of America

Boy Scouts of America by region

Advancement and recognition in the Boy Scouts of America

Associations related to the Boy Scouts of America

Local council camps of the Boy Scouts of America

Chief Scout Executives

Films about the Boy Scouts of America

Leadership training of the Boy Scouts of America

Literature of the Boy Scouts of America

Boy Scouts of America litigation

Local councils of the Boy Scouts of America

National camps of the Boy Scouts of America

National Executive Board of the Boy Scouts of America members

National Scout jamboree (Boy Scouts of America)

Order of the Arrow

Presidents of the Boy Scouts of America

Ernest Thompson Seton

Strengthen the Arm of Liberty monuments

Boy Scouts of America images

Girl Scouts of the USA

Local council camps of the Girls Scouts of the USA

Girl Scouts of the USA images

Local councils of the Girl Scouts of the USA

Girl Scouts of the USA people

"Local Councils" should be lower case, not sure about the hyphen in "America-related", and the others have Boy Scouts of America at the end. The literature cat is underpopulated. I really think we can loose Fictional Eagle Scouts. We should clean this up ourselves before one of those irritating CfDs comes around. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 16:06, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

The hyphen should go. LC should be lower case. The ones with BSA at the end are in other Scout categories; this needs a deeper look. The lit cat only having a few--I wouldn't worry about. I'm neutral on fictional Eagle Scouts. Rlevse 11:50, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

I'll fix the local council one today using AWB.Rlevse 11:52, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Looking at the naming conventions and at the CfD stuff, it looks like categories should be "x of y", properly it should be "Local councils of the Boy Scouts of America" and so forth. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 12:37, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Oops, I just started too. That's why the it's People associated with... too. I'll fix it.Rlevse 12:42, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

The Girl Scout council cat has the same problem.Rlevse 12:44, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Is this okay or should we rename all the ones that start with BSA?Rlevse 13:15, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree it is best to fix ourselves rather than waiting for a CFD. I defer to Gadget850, Rlevse, etc on exactly what to change here.Sumoeagle179 15:26, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

I knew about the GSUSA cats (and probably others), but wanted to bring this set up first. We also need to update the cats in {{Scouting}} as we change these. Note that by using <categorytree>, the cat lists at the top of the section automatically update. This looks right so far: xxx of the Boy Scouts of America. Hold off on the image cats, as those are a "technical category" and mey work a bit different. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 17:07, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

So you're saying you want to change the 6 that still start with BSA?Rlevse 17:13, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes. Here is a specific list:

• Advancement and recognition of the Boy Scouts of America
• Leadership training of the Boy Scouts of America
• Literature of the Boy Scouts of America
• Local units of the Boy Scouts of America
• Local council camps of the Boy Scouts of America
• National camps of the Boy Scouts of America

• Local council camps of the Girl Scouts of the USA

--Gadget850 ( Ed) 19:29, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

What about BSA images?Rlevse 22:20, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes. Per Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(categories)#Technical_categories it looks like it would use the same format. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 22:41, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

anything else?Rlevse 10:17, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use rationale

Some of you may have noticed that images using {{Non-free use rationale}} are now showing "Needs Article Name." When you edit the image page, there is no field for article. This field was just added to the template, but its addition is being discussed. I recommend that we don't get to excited about this, as there are some major changes in image templates being proposed.

You do need to include the article where the image is being used in the rationale. If you have the article name in the purpose field as our example shows, then you are fulfilling the criteria.

--Gadget850 ( Ed) 13:13, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Naming conventions

Currently, we have a full page at Article names on naming conventions. In my opinion, this is too involved and needs to be tightened up. Much of what is discussed in our current guideline is duplicated from Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English).

My proposal is:

Further information: Wikipedia:Naming conventions and Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English)

The article name should be the full name of the organization, event or award. Non-English organizations should use the most commonly used English version of the name, with the original name included in parentheses. Languages that do not use the Latin alphabet should be converted. If there is no commonly used English name, use an accepted and verifiable transliteration of the name in the original language.

The article title is subject to the same sourcing standards as the article content. Where there is a dispute over a name, editors should cite recognized authorities and organizations rather than conduct original research.

Please discuss. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 14:47, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Please remember that many associations do not translate their names: English translations may exist in these cases, but official documents of WOSM, WAGGGS, WFIS, UISGE, CES use the original language. For a recent example from WOSM please see [7], page 10.

I'm not really happy about raising this matter again. It was hard work to reach the consensus in Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Article names#Main points which fits far better for a multilingual movement than the "Use English - no matter if there is any translation" proposal. --jergen 09:25, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

After reading the main points, I attempted to summarize them as above. If I have gotten this wrong, then perhaps this is part of the problem. I do not want to change the intent of the guideline, just the wording. Our guideline is almost two pages long. It should be based on the WP guideline and work from there. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 11:06, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Your summary requests an English translation as title for all organizations using latin script. It does not reflect that most of these translations are not in use, have to be done by Wikipedeans (conflicts with WP:NOR) or may be ambigous.

The rules in our MoS do reflect this: They request english titles only for those associations that use an oficial translation - or for cases where usage is common. --jergen 18:52, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

There was a long argument about this nearly a year ago and I mediated a compromise at the beginning of this year. Some of what was done then needs to be properly integrated into the new structure. I'm in London right now and will look into this when I return to Australia on the 20th. I can not spend much time on WP right now. Please do not rush ahead with this. I might cause later problems. --Bduke 19:05, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

At this point, I am abandoning this as I don't seem to understand the implementation. I did add the WP guidelines for an number of non-English translations to Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Article names. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 19:06, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Since this is the English wikipedia, why are we titling things in foreign scripts? I don't have the keyboard to type in those names. Sumoeagle179 21:42, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm putting this on hold until after the 20th, when BDuke returns (he mediated this issue). I don't want to change the intent, but it needs to be refactored for clarity. If there are specific issues, please discuss them on the Article names talk page, but please hold off on changes. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 13:42, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Infobox WorldScouting

I added coordinates to a test version of the infobox at {{Infobox_WorldScouting/sandbox}}. See Template:Infobox_WorldScouting/testcases for samples. The updated template is in Template:Infobox_WorldScouting/sandbox. The only minor issue is the font size; at the standard 95%, the coords break across a line. The only way I see to do this without making the font smaller is to make the infobox a bit wider. Please discuss on Template talk:Infobox WorldScouting. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 22:27, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Done I did not increase the box width, as there is no solution that will fit all cases.

Default image

When using {{Infobox WorldScouting}}, if you don't explicitly blank the image, you get our generic Scout logo— Image:Scout logo2.svg. The generic logo is not appropriate for all articles; we should use it only for truly generic articles such as Scouting, Boy Scout, Cub Scout and the like. Suppressing the default image is not obvious, and has only been recently documented. I think we need to change the default to no image. Please discuss on Template talk:Infobox WorldScouting.

Done --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 13:19, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

open invitation

Several of us are working on an article at User:Phips/workshop/DP-Scouts, thanks to Phips, about Scouting in POW and refugee camps. We're trying to make this a feature quality article by the time it hits the presses. Please come visit, see if it interests you, and help if you can! Thanks, Chris 22:56, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Whitewash

I looked at the link Chris added to the news on Wayne Perry, [8]. Perry's taking Steve Fossett's spot. About that it says Fossett "..had asked to be be allowed to step down as a member of the Committee. Despite his departure from the World Committee, Steve Fossett remains very attached to the Movement, and we eagerly await news of new successful exploits....". As far as I know, Fossett is still missing. Face it, by now he's probably dead, which is sad. But this news bit is such a whitewash. It reads like Fossett is alive and the WSC asked him to step down and that he'll continue with his adventures. Rlevse 11:31, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't think your link is correct. The wording in that quote is very odd. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 13:33, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

oops, try this: [9] Rlevse 13:36, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

This sounds like something that happened before he disappeared and is just now appearing on the website. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 13:45, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Maybe, but it's dated Sep 30, three weeks after his plane crashed. Rlevse 13:47, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but this has probably been in the works for a while, probably after he became NESA president. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 14:06, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

That text is from the minutes of a World Scout Committe meeting of 2006. Full text is www.scout.org/en/content/download/6813/63303/file/C0702WSCommittee_e.pdf here.

--Lou Crazy 01:08, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Style guide

Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/scoutstyle As many of you know, I have been taking the lead on working our style guide. My goal is to have the guide formally accepted into the WP Manual of Style. I tore our old guide apart three months ago; I have since refactored most of it. I have eliminated material that was already a WP policy or guideline and tried to include the guidelines that a peculiar only to Scouting articles. I have not tried to change the intent of any of the guidelines we have agreed on. This now encompasses one style guide page and a few pages for specific processes and indexes.

I really need folks to take a hard look at this and give feedback. I'm not going to rush this—I don't plan to try to push this until after the end of October at the earliest.

Interestingly, our fellow editors in the Military History project are also pushing their MOS: WT:MILHIST#MOS. I wasn't really aware of this until I got my MilHist newsletter this morning. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 16:20, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

What a bunch of pussies

Bad enough you won't defend your own artilces (RELEVSE & CHRIS & GADGET), but you yourselves attack them (CAMP MINSI). Maybe if you all weren't such pussies, Camp Minsi would not have been lost. What kind of iditos vote to delete or merge their own articles. PUSSIES. All of you.

Not a set of balls to share. IDIOTS. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.134.136.206 (talk) 01:01, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Not that a response is warranted to you, a clearly unScoutlike sockpuppet, but I'm just in the mood to take on your spurious claims.

1. We defend our own articles, those worth defending. Those that are not have already been told they're not worth fighting for. We have guidelines for what is a useful article and what is baggage.
2. That you singled out three out of several dozen members shows who you are, and we're all long tired of you. Any time you're ready to stop editing the Wikipedia, we'll help you pack.
3. I defy you to point out anywhere on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Camp Minsi that any one of our members attacked the article. It was left alone to drown under its own cruft.
4. You're obviously not a Scout in your heart, so why even bother?

Signing my own post, unlike you, Chris 04:07, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

• I thought Camp Minsi deserved to remain an article. It was not crufty, but was in need of editing. I was going to ask that we ask that it be reinstated because I think the admin that deleted it went too far in claiming their was a consensus to have it deleted. That being said, I too think your comments were those of anilliterate anonymous coward sockpuppet cabrón. --evrik ^(talk) 04:58, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

This has all been a clear test of our guidelines, epecially Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/MOS#Non-national articles. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 11:07, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

• I disagree. If three people from the wikiproject had unified behind the minsi article, their would have been a clear consensus to keep the article. The actions of Minsi Patches are clearly retaliatory.

This was more of a test of the cohesiveness of the way we work, and as a patrol, we fail to use the patrol method. --evrik ^(talk) 14:51, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Precisely. BUT what failed here is the users who keep making articles that don't meet wiki notability and don't follow wiki nor project standards on that issue. They are the ones not using the patrol method. This is the inevitable result. The goal of the project is to make quality articles that also meet wiki standards-including notability, not defend everyone's pet article(s) just because it's Scouting related. I agree MinsiPatches is out of line in retaliating like this and in being grossly uncivil. For incivility, I have reported him.Rlevse 15:04, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

• As a WikiProject we are supposed to take leadership. We should defend each of these articles and fix them so they are at least palatable. Each camp article has the potential of being expanded, so we should oppose deletion. We should also stop arguing that they be merged as that just junks up other articles. Even if the camp is closed, like the Holt Scout Ranch, or Camp Circle X, they still provide some value for a historical record. So we should defend them, and if they are “crufty” strip them down to the bare essentials. --evrik ^(talk) 19:07, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

If they don't meet notability and won't survive an afd, there's no reason to create them. Or put them in your user sandbox or workshop until they are at the point they will meet that criteria. Creating articles in the state that most camp articles are in, even if they meet notability, just causes disruption and wastes everyone's time. — Rlevse • Talk • 20:08, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

• Yes, some of the articles are weak, but being poorly written is not a crime, otherwise half of wikipedia would go up in a mass orgy of deletion. The only disruption is caused when one gets nominated for deletion, which if he hung together and put a quick end to each of the deletion debates would be no problem. This is the only wikiproject I know of that actively sits on theior hands during deletion debates. --evrik ^(talk) 20:57, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
  • I actively sat on my hands on Minsi Camp, as did Chris and R, because you asked me to. As I told you, I would have moved to merge it; we took no action either way and it got deleted. I believe the three of us have been involved with most of the AfDs, so that is an unfair characterization. The point on which all of these have swung is not quality, but notability. Of all these, only Treasure Island included any material that gave it any notability. As far as "fix them so they are at least palatable", that still does not mean they will be notable. And who is going to do this fixup job? With work and real life, I have not done much real editing this week, and the next few weeks aren't going to get any better. The project has limited resources, and we need to apply them wisely. I would rather have 100 featured articles than 5000 non-notable stubs. We are not going to win every battle; we need to understand that and pick and choose the battles we can win and battles that we *need* to win. We need to operate within the broad Wikipedia guidelines, and that includes WP:ORG#Non-commercial organizations: "Individual chapters of national and international organizations are usually not notable enough to warrant a separate article unless sufficient notability is established through reliable sources." If we cannot establish notability on an article, then we need to let it go.

Let's look at another example: Camp Yawgoog. Does it establish notability? That article was created almost two years ago and there is nothing there that I don't see in almost every other camp article. There is nothing there that says this camp is notable; nothing that would make an outsider interested in reading the article. And that is the bottom line for inclusion: notability, not quality. --Gadget850 (Ed) 21:30, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

• I asked you to sit on your hands because I know that when it comes to camps, there is no support. One of the worst things about this project is that it is worse than some of the deletionists. In any case, at this point we're not achieving anything and really, the article debates will be decided by the admin closing the debate (and their particular whims and biases). As for winnign battles - with the time you spent typing vote to merge you could have said vote to keep. --evrik ^(talk) 22:17, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
  • We can neep and nop all we want in the AfD, but the bottom line is the content of the article. Why hasn't anyone gone back and edited the camp articles so that they show notability? Let's go back to our example of Camp Yawgoog. What can *you* do to show that his particular camp is notable? If this article went up for AfD tomorrow what could be done to the article that would make other editors think it notable enough to keep? That is where the focus should be. We simply cannot "win" in an AfD if the article does not justify it. In this last batch of AfDs, only Treasure island had the *content* to show it met the standard. --Gadget850 (Ed) 22:32, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
    • And I have no idea why I am quoting WP:ORG#Non-commercial organizations: to you; you helped update that guideline: Wikipedia talk:Notability (organizations and companies)/Archive2#Redux revisited. What am I missing here? --Gadget850 (Ed) 12:07, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I really do not know too much about US Camps and I have been out of things for a while, but here is an outside view. It is not the job of every WikiProject to defend all articles in their terms of reference. In fact it would be a bad thing to do. It is the job of a WikiProject to ensure high quality articles on subjects in their term of reference that meet all Wikipedia policies. I think we do that better than some projects. There is already a lot of criticism of WikiProjects because they just defend cruft in their areas. As for articles on camps in general, in the UK, all such articles have been merged into Scout County/Area articles except for the four national activity centers such as Gilwell Park. The same is true in Australia. One problem with such articles is that they do not demonstrate notability, but more specifically they do not do that because there are no independent sources. All sources are likely to be internal Scouting sources. That is a wider problem for us. --Bduke 23:47, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Scout camp burns in SoCal fires

The California wildfires of October 2007 article mentions that Camp Helendade has burned to the ground. Some online sources are here, here, and here, the camp's home page. Thank you all. —ScouterSig 18:53, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

THANK YOU.I'm putting this in the council and fire articles right now. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:22, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Update: the camp did not "burn down," as first thought. I will update the pages mentioned. —ScouterSig 22:39, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

New sig

ArielGold starting calling me "R" because my wiki name is unpronounceable. I also like User:Edokter's sig (I nom'd him for admin and he made it), so I've come up with this sig in Scouting colors, what do you guys think: — Rlevse • Talk • 12:49, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

• How about: — R.L.E vse • Talk • --evrik ^(talk) 13:46, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Nah. Thanks anyway. — Rlevse • Talk • 14:01, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Scouting History Symposium

For those who may possibly be interested, there's going to be a two-day event at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland, next Feb. 15-16 on Scouting- A Centennial History Symposium. One of the speakers is Nelson Block — author of A Thing of the Spirit about E. Urner Goodman. More info. is here JGHowes ^talk - 21:07, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Reference management

I started using Zotero for Firefox and this thing is slick. It can import references from a web page and export them in WP citation template format. I had created a Scouting bibliography before I found Zotero and I used it to grab every reference and stored it for later use. If I need a new reference, I can go to Amazon or wherever and use Zotero to build a new reference. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 20:31, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Looks good. I have just installed it, but I think it might take me a while to get my head around it. --Bduke 02:29, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

BSA Insignia Guide now online

Insignia Guide --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 08:25, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Are those images usable? Some of those I have never even seen. Chris 23:20, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Just as usable as the ones I've gotten from ScoutStuff.org. What have you never seen? --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 00:21, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

"Ambassador" Chris 00:56, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

No clue on that one. Perhaps I will Ask Andy. [10] --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 23:22, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Veropedia

Veropedia is a spin off from wiki that uses quality articles from wiki to build a quality online encyclopedia of verified articles. You must have approval to upload them. Note, no Fair Use images are allowed (wiki is headed there, I think too). Uploaders have to be approved to upload in their field of knowledge. I was approved to upload Scouting articles. I put Scouting up first here: [11]. I'll put up B-P's article next. I will start with our FA and GA articles. Most people on Veropedia are wikipedians. — Rlevse • Talk • 15:26, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

This seems an excellent initiative. Is there a way we could indicate on the wikipedia article that a verified version has been put on Veropedia? Perhaps something in the left column like the links to other language wikipedias? We would have to pursuade the community of course. --Bduke 22:02, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Apparently not right now. There is some resistance to this as some view it as spam. We could make our own talk page template. I think when I'm done with the uploading, I'll note somehow on our project pages what's uploaded to vero. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:12, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Veropedia uploads

See announcements on main project page. Scouting will be on the main page of Veropedia from 4-10 Nov, 2007. The people running Vero and I agree to only upload FA/A/GA articles, unless it's important, like Scouting for Boys, which is currently B-class, but nothing lower than B-class. It this vein, if you could help improve Scouting for Boys, Boy Scout, Cub Scout, Brownies, or Woodcraft Indians, that'd be great. Of the two running vero, one was a Cubbie and the others is an Eagle Scout.

I will soon add section to "Article Showcase" to show which ones are on Veropedia. I have currently uploaded Scouting_for_Boys, [[Wood Badge], Frederick Russell Burnham, Baden-Powell House, Brownsea Island Scout camp, Girl_Scouts of the USA, Gilwell Park, List of Eagle Scouts (Boy Scouts of America), Robert Baden-Powell, 1st Baron Baden-Powell, Scouting.

Currently on vero (it's in beta) you have to type in the full article name to find it, It's easiest to call it up on wiki then paste the name into your vero URL or search box. They're working on this being better. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:20, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Good work.Sumoeagle179 10:23, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Userboxes

After some examination and consultation, I have to report that several of our userboxes are using non-free images in violation of the non-free content criteria policy. Specifically, point 9: "non-free content is only allowed in articles." I have asked User:Kaboom88 to help update images on these to comply with policy.

The first case is {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Userboxes/Queen's Scout}}. Here is a comparison of the images used in the userbox, the article and Kaboom88's proposed update: User:Gadget850/Sandbox6.

Others are:

• {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Userboxes/Queen's Scout}}
• {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Userboxes/Queen's Scout (UK)}}
• {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Userboxes/Order of the Arrow}}
• {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Userboxes/Arrowman}}
• {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Userboxes/BSA Religious Award}}
• {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Userboxes/vigil}}
• {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Userboxes/Philmont}}
• {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Userboxes/Roving Outdoor Conservation School}}
• {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Userboxes/PTCalumni}}
• {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Userboxes/GSGold}}
• {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Userboxes/GSSilver}}
• {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Userboxes/GSBronze}}

--— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 16:19, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Good catch. Hope Kaboom can help because I'm not a graphics person. — Rlevse • Talk • 16:28, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

The "Arrowman" box should be free; the picture is tagged as such. —ScouterSig 16:34, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Wait... they are all tagged as free. What makes them not free? —ScouterSig 16:35, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

To clarify: the graphics for all of these are tagged as free, but they are a direct derivative of a non-free image, essentially a clone, thus are not really free. This is an issue I will take care of later. Again, look at the first two images at User:Gadget850/Sandbox6 one is tagged as non-free and on is tagged as free. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 16:41, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but the non-free one is the UK badge and the free one is the Australian badge. I am not sure the badges are really identical although they are clearly close. --Bduke 23:09, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm not the expert on that one. Unfortunately the one marked free was done by NThurston and he has not been active for some months. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 01:30, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

So I assume that the picture in Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Userboxes/Eagle Scout is "different enough." But what makes it different enough? (And I appoligize for not knowing what the rules are.) —ScouterSig 16:53, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

The Eagle Scout is different enough to be non-free; it is just a colored square knot with no background. I'm afraid the OA device is pretty much a clone. We could use an arrow or something similar to convey the idea of the OA. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 17:12, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Here are the easy ones:


I will however also need some clarification on the knots. Would it be ok to create an svg file out of the Eagle Scout knot then color it with the religious knot colors to make a legal religious knot emblem??
Could the Australian Queen Scout and UK Queen Scout use the same image? (Since they have the same queen and all)
I'm also curious to see if anyone has some ideas for the Girl Scout awards and Philmont userboxes. -- Kaboom88 23:47, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Those look good. I think the knot idea will work. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 03:07, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps a generic arrowhead for Philmont? Or a picture of the actual Philmont arrowhead. —ScouterSig 03:19, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

A generic brown arrowhead pointing up would work. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 10:10, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Where's the Brotherhood version?Sumoeagle179 10:23, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

No one ever made Brotherhood userbox. Do we really need separate boxes? --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 10:53, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Either one or all three. I have to agree with sumo here. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:50, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, we either need just the generic OA box and leave Brotherhood and Vigil out or have all three.-MBK004 22:30, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

I think that the Vigil user category may be upmerged, (see here). If it is, then a single userbox may be best. Three boxes I think is excessive. As is multiple Philmont boxes; a single one would do. —ScouterSig 22:47, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

• I agree with both. All Arrowmen are equal.
  • PTCalumni is used by three editors and ROCS is used by one. I will put these up for merge and announce them. If someone is really stuck on one, they can copy them to their userspace, but the logo does need to change.
  • I'm going to look at merging {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Userboxes/GS}} and {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Userboxes/Girl Guide}} and use a parameter to switch.
  • Any other userboxes we should clean up?

--— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 23:07, 2 November 2007 (UTC) Here are the Eagle knots:


And the Religious knots:



-- Kaboom88 23:13, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

I think the two OA member userboxes should be merged. I also prefer the look of {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Userboxes/Order of the Arrow}} (plain white background for entire userbox, instead of red border around picture), perhaps the OA userbox and Vigil OA userbox could be made in the same style. -- Kaboom88 23:16, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

That was fast! I just left you a note like 60 seconds ago. The Eagle knots look great, but we can't use the background on the religious knots, else they become a copy of the logo. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 23:17, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Religious knots fixed. -- Kaboom88 23:31, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Here are the Girl Scout Awards:

-- Kaboom88 00:22, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Most excellent! --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 02:12, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Here's the one for Philmont:

What should be (if anything) added to it for the Roving Outdoor Conservation School and PTCalumni userboxes? -- Kaboom88 03:20, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

This user is an Australian Queen's Scout.

This user is a UK Queen's Scout.

This user is a member of the Order of the Arrow.

This user is a member of the Order of the Arrow.

This user is a Vigil Honor member of the Order of the Arrow.

This user has earned a BSA Youth Religious Award.

This user has earned a BSA Adult Religious Award.

This user has earned BSA Youth and Adult Religious Awards.

This user survived a trek through Philmont Scout Ranch.

This user survived The Roving Outdoor Conservation School at Philmont Scout Ranch.

This user participated in a Leadership Conference at the Philmont Training Center.

This user is a recipient of the Girl Scout Gold Award.

This user is a recipient of the Girl Scout Silver Award.

This user is a recipient of the Girl Scout Bronze Award.

This user is an Eagle Scout.

This user is an Eagle Scout
with a bronze palm.

This user is an Eagle Scout
with a gold palm.

This user is an Eagle Scout
with a silver palm.

I recommend the ROCS and PTC boxes be changed in the same manner. For the UK Queen Scout, use the Australia image with the purple background. If you want to do something different for Eagle Scout go ahead, I've never been enamored of the color scheme.

All done now, how come the userboxes with the BSA emblem aren't a problem? -- Kaboom88 21:06, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

They are. I missed those. Any ideas? --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 23:43, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Do these look alright?

This user is a member of the Boy Scouts of America.

This user no longer wishes to be associated with the leadership of the Boy Scouts of America.

I wasn't too sure about the colors, so I'd thought I'd ask. Also, will the 3 userboxes featuring the WAGGGS logo need new images too? -- Kaboom88 04:29, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

I like them. The WAAGGS logo is a generic; I converted it from PNG to SVG, so it could probably use a good cleanup. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 12:06, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

I just added the silver palm option to my userpage. Nice work Kaboom! Actually, I have 5 palms, but no big deal. I still think we should have all three OA levels or just one. Sumoeagle179 13:38, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

As well as having an Arrowman and an Order of the Arrow box. If there were no objection to using the same logo, I could add a switch so we could use one box for all.

I did a bit of cleanup across the userboxes. Any box that adds a category can now turn off the category by adding categories=no. That way talk pages and the like won't show up in categories. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 17:18, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

This user is a member of the Boy Scouts of America.

This user has no issue with being associated with the leadership of the Boy Scouts of America.

This user is an adult leader in the Boy Scouts of America.

This user no longer wishes to be associated with the leadership of the Boy Scouts of America.

This user was active in the Boy Scouts of America.

-- Kaboom88 02:41, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't like the X over the logo in the box for alumni, that implies negative on a box not meant to be negative. Could we instead turn the badge from gold to silver, or put spider webs or a rocking chair around it? Anything but that X. We already have one that has the "no" symbol, which I already find to be pejorative. Chris 06:33, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

How about a grayscale version for the Was BSA userbox?

That is significantly more bueno, thanks. Chris 03:19, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I also changed the colors of Image:WAGGGS.svg and uploaded it as Image:GGGSgreengold.svg to the Commons for the Girl Guides userboxes. -- Kaboom88 10:00, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I added a BSA template for

This user is a parent of a Scout in the Boy Scouts of America.

.--THE FOUNDERS INTENT ^TALK 18:40, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Totor

Totor, Patrol Leader of the Cockchafers seems less than dubious to me. "Cock"+"Chafers"?? There are no external links on the page. I typed in the page title to Google and didn't seem to get anything nonwiki or wiki-mirrored. Only by typing in "Totor" and "Herge" could I find pages [12], [13], and [14]]; none of these have "Cockchafers" in them. Even the French title seems like it would be translated "Extraordinary adventures of Totor" if anything. What say you? —ScouterSig 04:13, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I say we move it. Or get a really strong cream, I knew a guy at camp once... :) Chris 04:23, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Cockchafer is legit. I did find this-http://www.kendall-bioresearch.co.uk/chafer.htm, and in Nebraska we called them junebugs, but apparently May is preferred. Chris 04:23, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

We should take this discussion to Talk:Totor, Patrol Leader of the Cockchafers --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 11:07, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

So moved, literally. Chris 02:40, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Infobox WorldScouting

I would like to make a few changes to the infobox

• Add coordinates
• Increase the box width from 18em to 20em so that the coordinates don't break across the line
• Remove the default image

Please discuss at Template talk:Infobox WorldScouting#Updates --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 15:57, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

What thinkest thou?

Should Scouting supporters get the project tag? An example would be Norodom Monineath Sihanouk

“ The Girl Guides Association of Cambodia has a high profile in society and is well regarded, mainly due to the support of Queen mother Monineath. ”

Chris 06:37, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Only people who join should get the project tag. — Rlevse • Talk • 10:58, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

• If Queen Monineath did/does enough for scouting, she may even be awarded 'importance=high' in the wikiproject tag on her article's talk page. But as I read it, I would now rate the article class=stub|importance=low for a Scouting tag. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 20:37, 7 November 2007 (UTC).

BSA et al end support for WOSM‏

Brother Jergen posted on the main page the crisis going on with WOSM right now (and welcome back, brother, you have been missed). While we don't yet know the reasons, they will likely come to light in the next few days and weeks.

Since this is our Project talkpage and not for an article, we may broaden what we can discuss, and this one tweaks my interest. I can't say I'm surprised or upset. I'm not married to the idea that BSA needs to be a part of WOSM, or that that WOSM in its present form since at least 1988 is valuable. Those trad Scouts have a lot of points-WOSM has severely gotten away from the For Boys-By Boys-About Boys vision B-P had in mind, and become a highly politicized self-perpetuating behemoth. The Chief Scout of the World had to fight and petition WOSM several times himself, and if the Old Man had issues, it's a movement he created and his vision should have been paramount. Even then WOSM was its own worst enemy.

My own examples and personal experience with WOSM turned me from being a "company man" over 15 years ago, and I have been criticized for not sticking with the team, but this is also why I am into non-aligned and not-yet-accepted movements. As each country fell to communism, fascism, nationalism, militant Islamicism, pick-your-own-ism, the first thing WOSM has done is to cancel membership in the world brotherhood for those Scouts, never mind you leave them feeling abandoned and tossed away, and never mind that those Scouts are not the ones who created the -ism in the first place, by God we have rules and those rules are not to be bent for an instant. That inflexibility is damaging and detrimental.

Once the Soviet Union broke up, the first thing WOSM did was to contract with the leadership of the Young Pioneers, of which all of the leadership of the new Eurasia region are veteran high staff. Scouting was not allowed to blossom naturally in those countries, and there are maybe one or two of those WOSM members that can rightly be called Scouts (Russia and Tajikistan cannot), while other nations have actual Scouts but WOSM won't play ball with them (Belarus, Ukraine...) as the ex-Pioneer cronies don't have their hooks in the orgs. I lived in Kyrgyzstan and was told to desist my helping their Scouts else it would delay their WOSM membership. I was there 12 years ago, they're still not members...

Don't get me wrong, BSA is no better in many respects, (and probably has caused much of the politics at WOSM) but at least they deal with immediate problems with some forward thinking, as they come up. That's why I struggle to keep this Project from being too BSA-centric, but that's another story.

I'm not shedding tears or losing sleep for WOSM, but I am getting off my soapbox. As a brother Scout to all of you brothers and sisters, be you present or former or quit for matters of conscience, no matter your organization, I thank each of you and I wish you the very best, and good night. Chris 05:51, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I started a subpage in my namespace for collecting the different statements: User:Jergen/WOSM crisis. --jergen 07:30, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Chris... maybe WOSM's problem is that BSA had too much influence on it until recently ;-)

--Lou Crazy 02:25, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Very possibly, you'll notice I mentioned that in my rant. :) Chris 04:21, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

• This is all very interesting, but has anything been reported in the mainstream media that we could use as a reliable source, to integrate this development into the BSA and WOSM articles? JGHowes ^talk - 09:04, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

• No, I think this is (at least at the moment) more of "general interest" for the project members. Including it in the respective articles at this state would be Recentism, specially as the developments are very unclear. --jergen 11:44, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Jergen here— we need to wait and see how this plays out. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 11:52, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

You're right. The BSA article doesn't specifically state that it's a member of WOSM, unless I'm overlooking something there (templates and infoboxes don't show on Blackberries, which is what I'm using here in a remote part of Argentina). "Other divisions" mentions World Jambo and so forth, but again no specific reference there to BSA's relationship with WOSM. Shouldn't this be mentioned? Of course, depending on how these latest events unfold, maybe that will soon be moot (not in the Rover sense). :o) JGHowes ^talk - 12:18, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm planning to include this in Scouting controversy and conflict, but I think we should wait for at least one month to get a clearer picture of the situation (and I need some distance from it). Coming weekend I'll attend a scientific conference of my association; I should meet our ICs and our Chairman there. Perhaps I get some answers on my questions. --jergen 07:45, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, we need secondary or tertiary sources, right now all sources are primary. I have not seen any news source picking this up, and neither the WOSM or BSA sites are mentioning it. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 10:40, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

There already was something on the WOSM site... this and this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lou Crazy (talk • contribs) 17:46, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Does this mean I have to remove the purple emblem from my shirt?--THE FOUNDERS INTENT ^TALK 18:06, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

No— since the SG has been removed it would appear that the crisis have been averted for at least the short term. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 20:10, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Reference desk Humanities

Someone has asked here why the Scout handshake was changed in 1972 to omit the little finger. If anyone in the project knows, please answer on the desk or on my talk page. --Milkbreath 11:23, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

I think it was to make it the same as the Scout handshakes in the rest of the world. As I recall, only the BSA did the handshake with a spread little finger at the time, the rest of the world didn't. (responded at help desk too). — Rlevse • Talk • 11:28, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Italy has a handshake with little finger, too, and still uses it. Supposedly it dates from the time when fascism disbanded scouting in Italy, and those scouts who kept operating in clandestinity wanted a secret handshake. So they did it with the right hand and with the little finger. That way no one else would notice. Even when scouting restarted officially after Italy was liberated the handshake remained the same, and we keep doing it with the right hand, except during the promise ceremony, when you shake the left hand and do the scout sign with the right.

--Lou Crazy 02:30, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

In Austria we also use the left hand with the little finger, Old Scouts told us that the little finger was a secret sign in "Underground Scouting" during Nationalsocialsm. -Phips 15:28, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Didn't people notice something was strange if you used the left hand?

--Lou Crazy 16:57, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

It was only among Scouts and former Scouts. Another point is that some say there is more conected if you do it with the little finger. See also the German article:de:Pfadfindergruß. Nobody knows were it exactly came from.-Phips 17:07, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Ok, but if non-scouts were watching they would notice something strange. And if they weren't watching, what would have been the point of a secret handshake? ;-)

I think that it's more likely that underground scouting in Austria used the finger with right hand, then switched back to left after WWII.

BTW, if you use the little finger you're not only more "connected", but you're actually doing something similar to the scout sign with its three fingers.

--Lou Crazy (talk) 17:43, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Maybe, it is also possible that they introduced it because they saw it at Jamborees and International camps from the BSA. In the 1946 edition of the Boy Scout Handbook of the BSA, we have in our Scout Archive it is included, in "Wie man Jungpfadfinder wird" (6th edition,1970, Boy Scouts of Austria), also in "Unterwegs" (Boy Scouts and Girl Guides of Austria,2nd edition 1979) it is included,it is not included in THILO (Swiss Boy Scouts,19th edition 1980), Baden-Powell "Scouting for Boys"(18th edition), "Wie man Pfadfinder wird"(Scouting for Boys) (World Brotherhood edition (Weltbruderschaftsausgabe)1955, German edition by the Boy Scouts of Austria)-Phips (talk) 17:10, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Songs

Do we want to try to track Scouting related songs? I was flipping through my mother's Cub Scout Songbook (1955) and noticed The Grand Old Duke of York. Curious, I checked, and there is an article on it as a nursery rhyme. Per the talk page, material on the song version had been removed, so I added it back with a reference. An article on Songs used in Scouting might be interesting. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 14:06, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

We've had Scouting songs since Dec 2006. — Rlevse • Talk • 14:15, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but it's not linked to any Scouting articles and very USA-centric IMHO, even referring to "the country" (!). I'd tag it {{global}}, except that yesterday a {{cn}} tag on another Scout article provoked a rather mastodon-like reaction from a Project member. So rather than a tag, may I suggest that Scouting songs either be renamed "Scouting songs of the BSA" or, alternatively, expanded in scope to include Scouting songs from Europe, Australia, etc. JGHowes ^talk - 16:27, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

response from the mastodon-it wasn't the tag that provoked the response, it was the attitude and the tone in your edit summary. Politeness begets politeness, rudeness begets rudeness. My first revert was done with a polite explanation in the summary, your own revert summary was heavyhanded and smug. Physician heal thyself. Chris 20:08, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Either or is fine with me. I find it interesting that this article is BSA centric but has German Girl Scouts in the photo. FYI, it's linked to at least other Scouting articles. — Rlevse • Talk • 19:04, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, the girls are German, so it should read "Girl Guides". BTW, the girls are members of the non-aligned Christliche Pfadfinderschaft Deutschlands. --jergen 08:49, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

That, and it is not much of an article; it is mostly lyrics. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 22:02, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Global-tagged it; the new guy's right on that. I like that tag, we have several articles that could use it. Chris 22:10, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

International organization leaders by year

I found this article/category, and would like to start filling in for WOSM and WAGGGS. Do you guys know where I can get a list of past Secretaries General of the World Organization of the Scout Movement? (as well as a more complete list for Director/Chief Executive of WAGGGS) We need to start filling in some of those missing teeth. Also, for bios like Missoni, we need a {{succession box}}, especially as we may soon have a new Secretary General because of the BSA letter. Chris 22:10, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

B-P statue

While visiting here in Rio de Janeiro this week, I was surprised to discover a statue of B-P in a downtown park. Who knew?

I took a pix, so maybe a place can be found for this image in some Scout-related article JGHowes ^talk - 00:52, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Maybe an article on tributes to B-P or one in the Brazil Scouting section.--THE FOUNDERS INTENT ^TALK 01:57, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

If you make it PD, GFDL, or CC you can store it on wikicommons. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:18, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Huh?--THE FOUNDERS INTENT ^TALK 13:21, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Scouting memorials or Scouting in Brazil --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 10:36, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Making it a free license will enable you to keep it on wikicommons and you won't have to find an article for it, it also enables other wikiprojects to use it. — Rlevse • Talk • 15:41, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

It would be a fine information and fine illustration in Scouting memorials-Phips 18:43, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

• Yep, especially since Scouting memorials says "none reported" for S. America right now. I'll attend to that as soon as I can JGHowes ^talk - 00:05, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Great, thanks--- Phips (talk) 18:22, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

 Done JGHowes ^talk - 07:59, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

What is a notable local unit?

What qualifies as a notable local unit?--THE FOUNDERS INTENT ^TALK 20:37, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Very very few, like if it were true, the first troop to walk on the moon. When they get started, they usually get merged into a council article. Only a very small number warrant their own article. — Rlevse • Talk • 22:17, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Even the first troops in a country, for instance India and Finland, are not substantial enough to warrant their own articles, and have been merged back into a parent article. If the Scouting Wikiproject guidelines were followed by all members (they are not), there should ideally be no article below council level. -- Chris (talk) 22:34, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Then why not dump the category?--THE FOUNDERS INTENT ^TALK 01:34, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Am I missing something here? What category? Just to generalize what is said above. In the UK material on local groups and districts has been generally merged into County (England) or Area (Scotland and Wales) articles (in checking just now I have just found one that needs to be merged). Similarly in Australia they have been merged into State articles. One problem is that many such articles are not put into any category, so are difficult to find. --Bduke (talk) 02:13, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Category:Local units of the Boy Scouts of America is the cat he's talking about. And dumping the cat is probably a good idea. The reason we have it is that the BSA part of the Scouting Project has had more problems in the area of sub-council articles than the rest of the project. — Rlevse • Talk • 04:09, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree, we should merge to Category:Local councils of the Boy Scouts of America. Having it tacitly approves the creation of these types of articles. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 13:23, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

• I think we should leave the category. But I'm ambivalent. --evrik ^(talk) 20:37, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

fleur-de-lis versus "Scout lily"

evrik is now insisting on "Scout lily" as an alternate name for an article for the emblem used by 90+% of the world's Scout organizations in some fashion. In 28 years and dealing with some 30 odd organizations, nobody calls it that. It is fleur-de-lis in English and French and transliterated from other organizations into English, they call it a fleur-de-lis, just like the article on the Wikipedia. Scout archivists and historians and patch embroiderers call it a fleur-de-lis, or FdL for short. There is no common widespread usage of "Scout lily", it is wishful thinking. The term evrik suggests is much less common and needs to be notated that it is not widely called such. Chris (talk) 22:40, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

The article should be fleur-de-lis but Scout lily can be a redirect. --Bduke (talk) 23:02, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

I have never heard "Scout lily", how many have? It should be a redir, not the main link. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:01, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, in German it is Pfadfinderlilie - which tranlates literally to Scout lily; but nobody with any knowledge of English would use this. --jergen (talk) 11:07, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

It is Pfadfinderlilie in Austria and Switzerland, too. I agree with jergen in the translation topic.-Phips (talk) 00:10, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Once again, Kintetsubuffalo has to make things personal by leaving nasty little jibes in the edit comments. Scout lily is not a common term, and I'm okay with it being a redirect to Fleur-de-lis in Scouting. FWIW it does show up in a google search.--evrik ^(talk) 15:46, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Not being nasty at all. You are misleading to use aka, since that stands for "also known as", when in fact it is not also known as that, except perhaps by you and some literal translations from other languages when Googled. All I was pointing out was that it was your proposal and not a broader one. The point has now been abundantly illustrated. Chris (talk) 21:22, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

• User:Kintetsubuffalo is putting words in my mouth. I'm going to walk away from this because this is ridiculous. --evrik ^(talk) 21:53, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Deletions

For those participating in deletion discussions, I really recommend reading Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions. This is a very good essay on how to keep the discussion focused and relevant. All too often, I see discussion that wander into unrelated areas and then start to become acrimonious.

My personal preference is to allow a deletion discussion to develop for about two days, then respond to specific points. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 16:07, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Sea Scouts New Zealand

Greetings! May I bring this new article Sea Scouts New Zealand, spotted while patrolling new pages, to your attention please? Thanks. --Malcolmxl5 22:01, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. This is a list of local units. And the same editor created Hawke Sea Scouts, a local unit. These are going to fail on notability issues. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 23:38, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

I have added a bit to the articles and notified the author. The general one could be improved to be OK, but the individual Group is not notable. Unfortunately, we do not have articles on Scouting in New Zealand at the level just below national. That would be the place to merge this article. --Bduke 00:32, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I may not be writing this in the correct place or appropriate forum - so please forgive my errors. If you wish the scouting portal to grow you need to encourage development which may be slow. Within New Zealand there is a great chance to have a really good article about sea scouting and many good (not sure what notable means in an international context) articles about individual groups. This reflects the de facto structure of sea scouting in NZ, the area/district/regional/zone distinctions do not have any real context and it is unlikely that anyone would write an article. If you want contributions to grow I suggest that you allow the individual group articles to evolved linked to a national sea scouting article. It is for this reason that I set up the structure in this way - competition will encourage other group leaders to contribute both to their own articles and to the national article. HawkeSeaScouts (talk) 05:36, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

5 old Boy Scout cards

I've uploaded 5 old British Boy Scout images to WikiCommons that were published before 1923, so PD (several were after 1923, so I didn't upload), from the New York Digital Image Gallery. These are old cigarette ad cards, which probably wouldn't get made today, but are very interesting historically, see [15]. — Rlevse • Talk • 22:46, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Images to improve#World Organization of the Scout Movement

I have placed a request to get the WOSM map cleaned up. Does anyone have any thoughts or suggestions? Chris 18:01, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Done, I think the colors go better together and show up on more monitors cleanly. Chris (talk) 18:47, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Former names and redirects

I had recommended using {{R from historic name}} on redirect pages where the association name had changed. This is incorrect— {{R from historic name}} is only for place names. Please use {{R from former name}} instead. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 14:36, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Founder infoboxes

I think that using {{Infobox Person}} is more appropriate than {{BSAseries}} for founder articles. {{Scouting|hide|hide|hide|show|hide|hide}} works nicely as a navigation element. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 19:54, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree.Sumoeagle179 (talk) 02:19, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree-Phips (talk) 14:18, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Boy Scouts of America's predominance

I think we need to do something with this, merge, delete or something else. I'm just not comfortable with it. It appears to have been split off from another article--does anyone know why? Note that in our new article section, someone noted it's an attack or OR piece. — Rlevse • Talk • 13:23, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

• (I was the guy who made the comments-I went to LA for five days, (no Wikipedia) :( came back and found this questionable essay.) Chris (talk) 19:15, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

It was forked from Scouting in the United States after you and I made comments—see the talk and history pages. The article is dancing around without explicitly stating that the BSA is out to squash the "competition." --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 14:34, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Hmm. It does seem to be pushing a WP:POINT a bit too much. I think it could be toned downed some. — Rlevse • Talk • 14:45, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

• I left my comments here: Talk:Boy Scouts of America's predominance. --evrik ^(talk) 14:59, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Fictional Eagles

I really think that Category:Fictional Eagle Scouts should be done away with. The information could be moved to List of Scouts, or more likely to List of Eagle Scouts (Boy Scouts of America). Despite the fact that its deletion was overturned, I think that it was more... riding on the coattails of Category:Eagle Scouts. Does anyone else feel this way? —ScouterSig 15:33, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I can support that. I was surprised it was kept too. I even said in DRV I'd support removing it and merging the fictional Eagles, even though I supported keeping the other two cats. — Rlevse • Talk • 15:35, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree. We had such a list in List of Eagle Scouts (Boy Scouts of America) at one point. When we put the article up for FL, it was felt that the fictional list was out of scope and it was moved to Scouting in popular culture#Fictional Eagle Scouts. I made this quite clear in the CfD when I discussed keeping the other two categories and deleting this one, but the category was "kept until listified."

The guidelines on the talk pages for List of Scouts and List of Eagle Scouts (Boy Scouts of America) both state that fictional Scouts should be added to Scouting in popular culture. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gadget850 (talk • contribs) 15:59, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

If we, the ScoutingWikiProject, agree to put it in Scouting in popular culture, no one else is going to object to it. — Rlevse • Talk • 16:04, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

If you mean delete the cat and list it in the article, then it is already done. There are five characters in the cat and 15 in the list. Snoopy is not in the Eagle Scout list per se, as he is a Beagle Scout and listed as such Comics section. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 16:40, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

The cat never had all the fictional Eagles that were in the pop culture article. I think Snoopy should be there too. The cat still exists (again now). I'm willing to delete it if that's our consensus. — Rlevse • Talk • 16:51, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

So far it's just us three (R, Gadget, and myself), but I don't know what truly convincing thing could be said to counter the above. —ScouterSig 16:58, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Do we want to do an official CfD or just kill it and get it over with? --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 17:14, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Whenever possible, it's always better to leave such decisions to those of us familiar with the topic, rather than those who merely surf deletion lists to get in on a cause not their own. I always recommend keeping it in-house. Chris (talk) 18:56, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Chris is right. I'll just whack it. — Rlevse • Talk • 19:39, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Bye! --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 20:01, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Eagle Scout son of Mike Huckabee

fyi, Newsweek reports today here that Huckabee's son was allegedly involved in an incident of animal cruelty while on BSA camp staff 10 years ago as a 17-year old. For the moment, there's no mention of it in the Mick Huckabee article, altho it was discussed at Talk:Mike Huckabee#Coverup of son's dog torture. Tonight on Larry King Live, Mike Huckabee defended his son, stressing that he achieved Eagle rank shortly after this incident and added, his son is "also Vigil, the highest honor in Scouting". JGHowes ^talk - 05:02, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Frankly I wouldn't put much creedence on this latest news flash. It's a presidential election and people are digging for dirt anywhere they can find it. From what I've read about the dog, no one seems to even have the details the same.--THE FOUNDERS INTENT ^TALK 00:56, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

New article

Scouting project members may be interested in an article I created yesterday about the early 20th century clergyman S. Parkes Cadman, because of what he had to say about Scouting, as quoted there. JGHowes ^talk - 15:03, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Very nice, put it in for DYK at Template_talk:Did_you_know. The Scouting section needs a ref as it's a quote. — Rlevse • Talk • 15:13, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Interesting. You really should use {{quote}} with a source parameter; see the documentation for {{cquote}} to see how pull quotes should be used. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 16:03, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for the suggestions. I'll get to that after the holiday. Merry Christmas everyone! JGHowes ^talk - 04:31, 23 December 2007 (UTC)