Talk:Scouting in Maine

Notability
This article looks like it is about a non-notable subject. For images in this article, use the picture tutorial. Also, you might want to create an account because your IP address is used by a recognised vandal. --Gareth Hughes 15:39, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

I worked on this article from a school computer, which is where the vandal thing comes in. A while ago I cleaned it up and I am just curious if there is anythign else I need to do to get this fully cleaned up.

I was just wondering if the use of a patch, such as the one in this article, fell under the fair use copyright policy. I am asking because I would like to add more patches to different pages and don't want to run into copyright issues. Thanks. --Beefybot 21:33, 16 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I believe scoutlogo would be applicable in this situation. &#126;MDD4696 17:46, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

pamola lodge

 * why did you merge pamola lodge with this article? Thats just stupid, I hate these articles that are created just so people can dump a bunch of other articles in it. The old articles were fine, and if this article is going to be created, why don't people put worthwhile information in here and not just dump a bunch of other articles in it. Thats my opinion and just so you all now, I am againts further merges. I am not totally against this page, I just think it should be a almost a list like page with links to other articles (such as pamola lodge) and not the end all singular article on everything scouting related in Maine. --Beefybot 18:17, 29 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Explanation-as per longstanding discussion at the Scouting WikiProject, small articles of less-than-council status are being merged into state articles as per agreement. Our intent is not to delete anyone's work or to minimize the importance of any article that already exists on the Wikipedia. Instead our goal is to tighten the information, to make it more relevant and useful for the general Wikipedian.  It was agreed that unless an article was large and had contributions from multiple authors, it was not notable enough by itself to meet Wikipedia's standards for a notable subject, and should be merged into the larger state article. If Pamola Lodge had met those criteria, it would not have been merged. Chris 18:53, 29 January 2006 (UTC)


 * ps-and if you think something is stupid, you've had ample time to comment and to respond to what people have been telling you about your articles. None of these things have happened in a vacuum. Chris 19:01, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

I've looked over what's happening and I am sorry I called it stupid, although I still beleive linking is better than merging, I will help with this article and help expand it. Sorry about that. --Beefybot 21:31, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Whoa I dont really know what happened here, but if someone could please look at the new stuff under KAC that would really help. I dont think its supposed to be in here like this. I'm going to work on salvaging some of the info in it, so if I could get a second opinion on all this, that would be great, same with the camp roosevelt page. --Beefybot 01:33, 8 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Regardless of the merits of the noteworthiness of some of this page's contents, I have to say that the article section about the lodge flap redesign seems to clearly violate Wikipedia's NPV policy.Wetzel95 20:25, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

I would just like tp point out that it is rather immature and innaproriate to be posting your own thoughst and ideas about things on wikipedia. I removed the following for exactly that case.

"The patch traders have won the day. Instead of keeping the traditional flap that connects them with arrowmen in the past, it has become more important that we have a fancy flap for trading.

For some the OA is the brotherhood of cherrful service, for others it is a flap trading society."

I hope some of the moderators in wikipedia would start to notice stuff like that. I'm going to try and put the KSR patch back on here since its a scan of a patch I have. The KSR merge was probably a good idea though. --Beefybot 02:00, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

attention tag
This article drips with POV and reads like an advertisement. Can someone please clean this up and make it look like it belongs here? Chris 19:21, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I fixed it a little and standardized the camp director page. Alot of the information uder KSR was just pretty words so I cut it back alot. --Beefybot 05:38, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Historical council information to be folded in
Historical council information to be folded in -Kintetsubuffalo (talk • contribs) 21:36, 18 September 2006


 * Maine Waterville Council 1918
 * Maine Auburn Council 1917 1919
 * Maine Bath Council 1917 1919
 * Maine Saco Council 1917 1919
 * Maine Old Town Council 1919 1920
 * Maine South Portland Council 1918 1921
 * Maine 217 Biddeford & Saco Council 1921 1924 ended 1924
 * Maine 216 Bangor Council 1919 1924 changed name to Penobscot 216 1924
 * Maine 216 Penobscot Council 1925 1929 changed name to Katahdin Area 216 1929
 * Maine 216 Katahdin Area Council 1929
 * Maine 218 Portland Council 1919 1922 changed name to Cumberland County 218 1922
 * Maine 219 Oxford County Council (Maine) 1920 1924 merged into Cumberland 218 1929 1924
 * Maine 710 Pine Tree Council 1925 1929 merged into Cumberland County 218 1929
 * Maine 218 Cumberland County Council BSA, Maine 1922 1933 changed name to Pine Tree 218 1933
 * Maine 217 York County Council 1927 1935 merged into Pine Tree 218 1935
 * Maine 218 Pine Tree Council 1933

Tag changes
I updated the tag changes. I removed the advert tag; the article is a lot better than when it was added last year. I added expand-section to the Girl Scouts section; that section is a disgrace when compared to the rest of the article. GRBerry 13:08, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Neal Manufacturing Company slides
The gallery Neal Manufacturing Company slides is on the commons. Seeing as the company was in Maine, should any mention of it be made? --evrik (talk) 15:21, 19 March 2012 (UTC)