Talk:Magyar Cserkészszövetség

Attention tag
Expand program section for B-class, and preferably add more refs. Rlevse 10:18, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

English name
I checked out the National Scout Organisations, and the name of this organization in English is Hungarian Scout Association. I think we should change it to that name. --evrik 22:44, 27 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorry, but we had this discussion before. The given English translation is used by different hungarian Scouting organizations, pls see User talk:Jergen. --jergen 09:29, 28 October 2006 (UTC)


 * The name as it currently is listed does not fit in with WikiProject_Scouting/RulesStandards. The discussion is now going on at Proposed changes to non-English WOSM member article titles, so I suggest we keep our comments there. --evrik 09:43, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Program
This is the highest rank. Chris 18:53, 21 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Undoing colon so the image shows up again-does this rank have a name? Chris 03:36, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Magyar Cserkészszövetség membership badge.png
Image:Magyar Cserkészszövetség membership badge.png is being used on this article. 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 this Wikipedia article 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. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and 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.

BetacommandBot 04:19, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Copyright Violation?
Substantial portions of several paragraphs found on this page appear to be a direct cut-and-paste from one of two web pages: Hungarian Scouts in Exile About Us or About Hungarian Scouting. The paragraphs need to be extensively rewritten or the violating content removed. -- btphelps (talk) 01:06, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
 * As the original author of this article three years ago, I thought I should give it a look. Those sites appear to closely mirror each other in tone and style, but I'm not seeing that mirrored here, can you give an example I can look at? The content obviously is going to be similar, it's a relatively narrow topic. Also bear in mind I have found three of our Scout articles later copied verbatim on other websites, but they were actually written here first. (That was kind of a weird shock, reading my own words on another website) I certainly do not want there to be any thought of impropriety on our part here. Thanks for the heads up, and for your continued work on the White Stag stuff. Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 01:23, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
 * ps-I removed your comments on my page as they should go on my talkpage, not my userpage, and I was answering here at the same time. I never saw either of those sites before today, I maintain that it's a small topic and if there is resemblance, it it possible to have happened the other way around. I'm seeing our text used in a lot of unusual places outside Wikipedia. Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 01:33, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
 * please note I am following the discussion at the article, this discussion does not need to be duplicated on my talk page. I have asked the admins at the Scouting Project to take a look at this article for me and see if they can find the apparent copyvios you're talking about, maybe it needs a fresh pair of eyes. I wrote the original from source material I've had since 1990, the sites may have been copied from here, I never saw them before today. The tone, tense, languange and writing of those articles seems to me totally different than my own, and where there are similarities, it's a small topic, there must by default be overlap. This is not a large organization and the few English-language sources are kind of nepotized. Piet Kroonenberg, Gregg Sablic and I all had the same material base to work from. Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 01:46, 18 September 2008 (UTC)


 * np, was trying to be thorough in notifying you, put it on your user page by mistake. This may very well be an instance where the external sites have copies your work. -- btphelps (talk) 05:29, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I appreciate it, and for the assumption of good faith. When I do borrow from sites, (and we all sometimes do, it's the nature of information these days) I change the wording, correct and update the facts and so on, so what we have on the 'pedia is available to all and up-to-date as possible. Keep up the diligence, feel free to call me on it if ever I seem in the wrong. Köszönöm szépen! Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 05:39, 18 September 2008 (UTC)


 * As to the duplicate copy, see the phrases "Scouting was well organized", "Scout troops are organized", "its own Scout Camp on the outskirts of Budapest". I think the rule of thumb for copyright is three or more words. But again, if they've copied from you, it's their error. -- btphelps (talk) 05:54, 18 September 2008 (UTC)


 * This matter was listed on the copyright problems board on September 17th. Investigation verifies some textual duplication. At least one of the suspected sources cannot have copied text from Wikipedia, as it predates the article here considerably. (See archive from 2003) The other site is not archived and indicates it was last updated 23:36 21/02 2006. Any infringement there may be against us or the other site. I'll look at it more closely after addressing the one that is an obvious concern.


 * While it is quite plausible that the external site drew from the same source material used by contributors here, it's unlikely that whole sentences such as "Scouting was well organized and popular in Hungary until it was banned in 1948" and "The World Organization of the Scout Movement maintains ties and provides support to the reemerging Scouting movements in the countries of their birth" would be separately and spontaneously derived (our article, above-linked archived source), which would suggest that at best both sources duplicated from somewhere else. A lengthy section in our article when it was first created beginning "In the early fifties" is redundant to that external site, with slight changes (change of first person pronoun to article, "unfortunately the troop has since disbanded" becomes "the troop has since disbanded", etc.).


 * Certainly, they had it before we did, and hence any text we have that duplicates their site must be revised/removed unless it can be demonstrated through the permission process that the material was previously published in a public domain source or under license compatible with GFDL.


 * As this investigation has eaten considerable time this morning and I cannot immediately clean the article, I am replacing the page with the copyright template to prevent our continued publication of problematic material. It is my intention later today to do a line by line comparison to see what material may still infringe on that source and to revise or remove it accordingly. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:23, 25 September 2008 (UTC)


 * As the template notice below indicates, duplicative text from the first source has been addressed. The second source seems to be solely redundant and is unlikely to be a concern. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 16:25, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed
One or more portions of this article duplicated other source(s). Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a license compatible with GFDL. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 16:11, 25 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I have compared this article and the referenced web page, both manually and with WCopyfind. I do not see any plagiarism here. --—— Gadget850 (Ed)  talk  -  18:59, 25 September 2008 (UTC)


 * The copied material has already been removed. As one single example, in addition to those noted above, compare the removed section beginning, "A new feature of Magyar Cserkészszövetség is that it is not town-oriented...now they more often are attached to church parishes." to the source, "A new feature of the movement is that it is not town oriented....now they more often belong to parishes." And with respect to recent edit summary, my apologies for the "clumsy" rewrite; I followed the capitalization conventions in the duplicated source. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 19:06, 25 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Glad to see the problem has been resolved. The author is obviously careful -- the duplicate text was not extensive and likely accidental. This encourages me to very cautious about copying from sources I use. BTW, I don't think this is Start Class quality any longer. Given its length and quality of sources, it merits at least C Class, so I upgraded it and removed the "immediate attention" tag. -- btphelps (talk) (contribs) 14:34, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Hungarian Scouts in Croatia
The Hungarian scouts in Croatia haven't got own association because in this country only one official scout association licensed (the Croatian). The other problem is the few hungarian descent child so they guess make only one troop wich is cover the whole country. They are making patrools and not troops in the settlements. The official name is Horvátországi Magyarok Zrínyi Miklós Cserkészcsapata (HoMZMCSCS).

Source: the groupleader and the Hungarian Wikipedia. -- Qsf - 11:02, 20 January 2009. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Qsf (talk • contribs)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Magyar Cserkészszövetség. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6AJxh3uLm?url=http://scout.org/en/content/download/22261/199900/file/Census.pdf to http://scout.org/en/content/download/22261/199900/file/Census.pdf

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:20, 30 May 2017 (UTC)