User talk:Rlevse/Archive 1

TALK Section
Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 15:35, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

You might want to put this on your user page instead. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 17:28, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

Yvonne Wanrow
Thank you for your comment on the article. Indeed, the justices ruling in the case did find that her gender and ethnicity were factors in her reception of an unfair trial. For more information about why, you can follow the external links or check out the texts used as references from your local library. If you feel that the article is written from a certain point of view, feel free to point out how and why on the talk page, and then to improve it yourself. I also welcome criticisms on my talkpage.--Rockero 04:29, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

User page/talk page
Hello again Rlevse. There seems to be some confusion about what goes on a person's user page and what goes on their talk page. Generally, Wikipedians use their user pages to describe themselves, their interests, and to gloat about their contributions. Of course, they are free to use the namespace anyway they see fit (within certain limits). A person's talk page, on the other hand, is generally used by members of the community other than the user him/herself to ask questions, make comments, ask for advice, request arbitration, et cetera. In line with this standard, I have moved your comment on the Yvonne Wanrow article from my user page to my talk page. You may want to split up the content on your talk page between your talk and user pages, but of course that is your prerogative. Just a friendly FYI.--Rockero 18:36, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Merit badges
Thanks for the correction! I'm glad somebody double-checked me on that. I think an article on Merit Badge Collecting would be interesting (I didn't know people collected merit badges), but merging the list would be a bad idea. The list is plenty long to stand alone, and I think it's useful as a separate entity. Tuf-Kat 05:57, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I've put some notes at Talk:Merit Badge Collecting. Overall, it's a great start!  The images are especially well-done, I think. Tuf-Kat 06:42, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
 * That was actually on purpose, they were unneeded extra text. Further tabled and subsectioned the article to be readable. Great images though! :) Staxringold 17:22, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
 * You really need copyright info on those merit badge images, whether you took them yourself or they are copyrighted property of the BSA. Staxringold 18:08, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I did get permission to use the images. I took the photo myself and got permission to use them. It's the motif/design that they have the copyright on.  A letter with permission is in the works.  I wrote on the image tag exactly what BSA legal told me to.Rlevse 18:11, 13 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Regarding your note on my page. I hadn't had a chance to re-check the images QUITE yet, hold on! :) I was just trying to see if I could clean up the prose on the Merit badge collecting page first. If you feel someone is reverting to unfair personal attacks, those can be reported. Otherwise, just as in real life, we have to all put up with different people with different personalities. I think you're doing a fine job with the article, you're really addressing requested changes quickly. --JohnDBuell 20:03, 13 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Image rationales are looking great, still working through prose and want to give it a good spell/grammar check. One thing I saw in the "Type G" section: "were Foundry Practice, Grasses, Legumes, and Forage Crops (later renamed to Forage Crops)" - uh what? :) What WAS "Forage Crops" prior name? Oh and the person you were asking about is not an admin. --JohnDBuell 20:13, 13 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I'm done with my typo/grammar corrections. If you can find that original name for "Forage Crops" I'd appreciate knowing :) --JohnDBuell 20:27, 13 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Ah HA! Let me have another look at that paragraph then and see if it's possible to reword it at all :) --JohnDBuell 21:47, 13 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Yes I left the one reference un-numbered - the first two that you had did have superscripts, so I knew that those were specific references. That last one I wasn't sure where you used it, so I was hoping you'd change it into a numbered reference, or tell me where to include it :) I went and got out my uncle's and grandfather's handbooks this morning.... I agree that RebelGuys2 did a GREAT job responding with specific suggestions. Pity they didn't come up when you put the article in Peer Review! I have no idea where to find a reference to the changes of the badges as America changed - seems a little obvious to me really - do you have any of the Requirement books that print JUST the requirements for badges? I used to, but I think they got thrown out :( I'm wondering if they have anything on such changes. Or maybe in Boys' Life? --JohnDBuell 14:56, 14 December 2005 (UTC)


 * No I hadn't changed that one reference, I still don't know to which specific item it was referring ;) Actually I think the thing is that it might be obvious to US about the evolution of the badges, knowing US history over scouting's 95 years, but it may not be obvious to non-US residents/citizens. I really don't have a lot of secondary literature on scouting, just four editions of handbooks, copies of the Fieldbook, and a few merit badge books. --JohnDBuell 15:15, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Well, like I said, it's too bad that these things didn't come out during Peer Review. But at least these are valid, concrete and specific suggestions that can easily be worked on. --JohnDBuell 15:46, 14 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I concur. Leave a message on Raul654's talk page, ask for the nomination to be withdrawn. Archive the current one, move the article to a new name, rewrite the appropriate parts of it (the Origins section could be dropped, since it was the origins of merit badge collecting, the next section explains merit badges themselves). When you're happy with it, re-submit it under the new name as an FAC. --JohnDBuell 15:59, 14 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Okay, I removed the fac template from the article's talk page. Good luck with the renaming and rewrites - I may not be around for the rest of the day today. --JohnDBuell 16:26, 14 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Regarding naming: good point. That would only leave potential options as something like Generations of BSA merit badges or Designs of BSA merit badge generations or something else like that. I think you're right, leave it where it is, maybe get some more feedback (is there a WikiProject for Scouting yet?), re-work, and re-submit. --JohnDBuell 18:42, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Aritcle Size and Search
The reason it is not showing up on the search is probably because it is very new. Give it a few more days. I used a bit of external software to count it for you. I make the wikicode 25,891 bytes. The HTML document will probably be somewhat bigger. I looks featured quality to me. Good luck with that. :) --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 21:29, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Merit Badge FAC

 * On the Wikipedia, we welcome everyone's contribution, regardless of age, race, creed, or any other aspect. I don't know what you mean by "page for people like him" but I will tell you that I had my difficulties with Stax when I first met him.  We have become good Wikifriends because we value each other's contributions.  Please don't paint with a broad brush.  Wikipedia is about a community effort in a welcoming environment. Thanks. -Scm83x 11:32, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Contributions are welcome, but Stax calling his me crazy is highly inappropriate. He's the one that made a personal attack, not me. He's is definitely in need of 'keeping it cool' Rlevse 12:48, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi, there. You found my name, not that it's very difficult to find - stalking much? ;) I'm kidding, of course. As for editing out comments: you never, ever touch somebody else's comments until they have said that the problem has been resolved. Even then, it's best to create a archive page. If you'll see the FA review for The West Wing (television) here, you'll see that someone created an archive page by adding "/SolvedIssuesArchive1" to the end of the URL and linking to it from the main page, and copying and pasted the resolved issues only into that page. Good luck. -Rebelguys2 14:42, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

I'd be glad to. I'm in the middle of final exams, which is the only reason it's 10:30 AM and I haven't been to bed yet, so I'll probably be around at completely random times for the next week or two. Good luck! -Rebelguys2 16:34, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Edit counting tool
Howdy. By using the tool found here, you can find out more about your edits than you ever cared to know, probably. Danthemankhan(talk) 20:01, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Changing lists into prose
Regarding the Examples of merit badge changes subsection of Merit badge types (BSA): It now just looks like an unbulleted list to me. Have you considered just rewriting all of it into one single paragraph? --JohnDBuell 17:20, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Vandals
If it was an image that suddenly appeared where one of your existing images SHOULD have been, then it was the image itself that was vandalized and not your page and its text itself. It sounds as if an administrator may have caught and restored the appropriate image. --JohnDBuell 21:19, 16 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I recently had a case where someone put in an inappropriate photograph with the same name of a photo that had been deleted because it was never properly sourced. And so any article that linked to the new image with the same name - surprise! - had an inappropriate photograph. That's why I was suspecting the images at first. --JohnDBuell 21:34, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

I didn't get your messages until today. Sorry about that. For future, if you can't get hold of anyone who can help you, you can try Help Desk. For information on templates, you can check out Help:Template. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 16:07, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Re:Merit badge article review
Hey there - I suggest what be done about the lists is like this:

Instead of:
 * blah 1
 * etc 2
 * note 3

have this : blah 1, etc 2, note 3.

Thats usually the kind of thing I do - good luck with getting your article featured. — Wackymacs 21:44, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Well I know its a bit different in your article, but you can do something like this:

Blah 1, these are unusual kinds of blah; etc 2, the most prominent... Semi-colons are good ;)

Wackymacs 10:37, 28 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I only just had a chance to have another look at it myself. I think it's in MUCH better shape, and I'd go ahead and put it back up at FAC. --JohnDBuell 18:56, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Take your time with it - but I'm probably going to abstain from voting on a second pass through FAC since I've helped 'edit the heck' out of it. --JohnDBuell 20:21, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Yeah I think when you're ready, go ahead and put it back on FAC. I'll lend support - although if I'm asked to recuse myself and abstain from voting, I'll do it. --JohnDBuell 03:06, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the invite to participate in the FAC. I am going to be offline for the next week, so I will not ba able to participate (getting married will do that to a guy). --Gadget850 14:51, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

I read your comment about the /temp page, and added another suggestion to it, as someone mentioned under the FAC how there shouldn't be a reliance on 'mouseover'. --JohnDBuell 16:27, 30 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Added a comment on the /temp page. --JohnDBuell 17:07, 30 December 2005 (UTC)


 * The width between a - and a – (&amp;ndash;) has a slight difference, and most people prefer the longer one, which is the one created by HTML (or the latter). --JohnDBuell 18:04, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Triumph of the Will (Nomination)
OK, I tried to explain the Lion King image. Here's my source for it: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0110357/trivia. There are also a few websites, like this one (http://www.lionking.org/movies/) that offer downloads of the scene. If I could, I'd put that in there, but something tells me it's a MAJOR copyright violation. (I think the streaming Quicktime is the only available one at present) Palm_Dogg 19:06, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Merit Badge FAC
Good stuff. I found out about the "humor" merit badges at http://www.streamwood.net/cat568.htm. And, while I am still on merit badges, I like to present you with the Good Article Writing Merit Badge for the great work you have done on this article. Zach (Smack Back) 19:27, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Rlevse, you have done some outstanding work on this article and I commend you for that! I will continue to watch the article's progression and help in any way that I can. All of the recent suggestions on the FAC page in regards to how the article should progress have my head spinning because there are so many of them hehe. At this point I'm not completely sure which suggestions I agree or disagree with. If you want me to check anything or help in any way (with this article or any other one) - let me know, I would be happy too. You are a great editor, keep it up as time permits :) --Naha|(talk) 15:15, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Got one for you-what the heck is this thing really? http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=7735203216&ssPageName=ADME:B:SS:US:1 YiS, Chris 21:46, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Template:User eagle scout
There's a good reason the image on the Eagle Scout template was changed. I totally agree with your insights, but we can't change it back - I've posted more on the template's talk page. -Rebelguys2 19:03, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

MB FAC
I wouldn't worry too much about getting every last person to change their vote - some people simply won't come back, and administrators will take into account that you've satisfied objections without any new responses. Nixie has been around a long time and is a very tough, yet clear-headed and helpful individual - I think he's just looking for the article name change, which should be a very quick change to make. Tuf-kat and Tony, however, I haven't worked much with before. The latter's prose objections can always be an issue - there's always room for improvement, however subjective. He makes some good suggestions, and the article could use a good copyedit, but a handful of naysayers at this article's close isn't going to hurt anything if you've responded sufficiently to specific complaints. Tsavage always has a long list of possible improvements to FA candidates; I think that, in this case, his objections can be resolved simply by clarifying the scope and focus of this article - "merit badge types."

He seems to want more information here, less information there, and so on. I can see where he's going, and your problem is that this article isn't clear and very tightly written to emphasize that the primary focus are the sections about the actual, physical badges.

I probably won't get around to it tonight, but I'll get around to finely going through the article soon. I'm looking at a rewrite of the lead section, as well as massive copyediting throughout the body. As a side note - I don't understand the need for the table with the "Botany" merit badges. I can see that it's there to compare the two types of badge, but why did we suddenly get so specific here? Why couldn't we just use Botany badges for the main Type F and Type G boxes? I hesitated to bring it up on the main FAC page as I wasn't sure if I was missing something there.

Happy New Year! -Rebelguys2 02:17, 1 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh, and I don't know if "retort" was the right word to use on my talk page. ;) -Rebelguys2 02:18, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

We may want to re-reconsider using Merit Badge Design History (BSA) as an article title, and one of the sections could be "Collecting different generations of merit badges" - I think this would meet some of the objections for clarifying what the article actually IS or ISN'T about. Just my $0.02. And Happy New Year! --JohnDBuell 03:11, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

If we use the word DESIGN in the title, people may confuse it with the motif rather than the basic badge type. I see where this argument is coming from, but i just haven't thought of a just the right title. This is why I suggested waiting awhile before we settle on one; definitely after most copyediting is done. I think part of this comes from it starting out as including more collecting info and then we took it out. However, at this point, I strongly feel all sections should stay in. I thought about removing the Botany F&G section.

HAPPY NEW YEAR (I guess us three aren't the party animal types -;) Rlevse 03:34, 1 January 2006 (UTC)


 * What about Merit Badge Design Evolution with a counter-article at Merit Badge Intelligent Design (sorry, couldn't resist)? I see the dilemma, but I think part of the objections are really stemming from needing to settle on a title so everyone can say "Oh yeah, that's what this article is about!" --JohnDBuell 15:06, 1 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Hmm, that may be good, or something with manufacturing in it. I'll add this to the FAC section on this.  I still think people will get hung on the word design, as opposed to motif.  We'll see.  Rlevse 15:57, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Yep, I'll be getting around to it sometime after the dust has settled from the name change and such. -Rebelguys2 19:08, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Hey guys, had fun working with you all on the Merit Badge history article ...if there is anything else I can do there, or on any of the other BSA (or other) articles in this series or anywhere else let me know. Its really nice working with folks who communicate well and take constructive criticism ..constructively and do not become defensive about it hehe :) I kind of lost track of where we are with the BSA "project" ..so again, feel free to fill me in or ask for help with anything ..I'll be happy to TRY :) --Naha|(talk) 19:19, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the update Rlev! --Naha|(talk) 20:22, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

You deserve this
((old link)) Brother, I want to share this with you, but didn't think it would be right just to add it to your userpage without asking you. Chris 04:53, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

ps-Randy please e-mail me Chris 06:08, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Scout titles
<Looking at Manual of Style (MoS), I would believe that scout, scouter and scouting should be capitilized only when used as a title or as part of the group name. On the other hand, BSA appears to capitilize all uses of scout. On the gripping hand, would scout be capitilzed when refering to a non WOSM scout? I would tend to go with the MoS useage for Wikipedia entries. --Gadget850 16:03, 5 January 2006 (UTC)


 * On the worldwide article on Scouting, it says "Note: The S in the word Scout is always uppercase when it refers to Scouting activities." The accepted usage for all groups in English, regardless of supernational membership, is capitalized to differentiate it from the profession. Chris 06:07, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Change of mind. Per The Language of Scouting:
 * Capitalize "Scout" and all words beginning with "Scout" (such as "Scouting" and "Scouter") unless the meaning is not related to the Scouting movement.

--Gadget850 20:22, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Fonda
The problem with the Henry Fonda lies in it's extensive use of numbered URL links. To comply with the Manual of Style, these links should be converted to footnotes. One of the quirks of WP footnotes is that the references get numbered in line with those links, but the actual notes start with 1. While you can manually set the number in the footnote, it's a hassle if anyone adds more links. We could go in and convert those 18 links to footnotes, but it is a pain (I've done this before). I would recommend that you let it stand for now: someone who is really interested in the article will fix it.

BTW, footnotes should go under a ==Notes== section.

dab is short for disambiguation. The original link was Eagle Scout, which leads to a disambiguation page; I changed it to Eagle Scout which now goes directly to the proper page. I've been doing this as I find it. --Gadget850 16:20, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

After reading footnotes again, there is no preference for footnotes or embedded links. It looks like the recommendation is to use the style already in use in an existing article. --Gadget850 18:18, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

I think footnotes work better, but it seems to be a matter of preference. --Gadget850 18:53, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

NESA
I have mixed feelings about designating on the Eagle Scouts list which Eagles are also NESA recipents since it's a politicaly motivated award really.

I would perfer a seperate list be made of people who also have the NESA.

grazon 22:09, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

change of heart
After seeing Michael S. Dukakis on the list of DESA (not NESA that was a mistake) recipents I have decided you are right about it not being politicaly motivated.

grazon 23:54, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Scout Project
Yes: That's a capital idea. There are any number of things to do that should be co-ordinated. I'm on Woodbadge staff this year, so I've been thinking of adding some stuff.

As far as renaming the rank articles, we need a consensus on keeping the individual articles, or keeping List of BSA rank requirements (talk). I could easily go either way on this one.

I'm going to be traveling next week, so my contributions are going to be spotty. The next week I will be recovering from some minor surgery and will be bored to tears. --Gadget850 21:39, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Has anyone started a discussion on this yet? --Gadget850 15:43, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up! Maybe we could suggest this as an Eagle Project to someone? ;) Nah, probably not.... --JohnDBuell 18:34, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Follow Me, Boys!
I just uploaded a higher quality picture for the infobox. The last one, when automatically re-demensioned to fit the info-box template, became distorted hehe. --Naha|(talk) 16:26, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Hehe yes I have your user page on watch, originally to help with Scout stuff, but I also enjoy colaborating with other editors such as yourself who are easy to get along and work with, so I will help out in other areas too if I can :) --Naha|(talk) 16:39, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Hmm. The phto in the Undisputed (film) article is distorted too. Generally I try to find larger picture, rather than a smaller one because they don't really get distorted if they are shrunk, but when they get blown up ..that tends to happen. You might try this one. --Naha|(talk) 16:50, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Scouting article improvement
Thanks for letting me know about this and for listing my name. I would be very glad to help in this effort to improve BSA articles. Have a nice day! Dustimagic *\o/* (talk/contribs) *\o/* 22:41, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Brescia
Yes: I just saw that also. I was going to revert it and refer to the Notability section on the Talk page. I'm not happy the guy is a bank robber, but it is what it is. I did the Google test because the Brescia article was so skimpy, and it did pass: He's an Eagle. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 23:03, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Cheers
Thanks for the comment on Cheers' FAC! I ref'ed the Portnoy link, and hope Cheers can garner your eventual support vote! :) Staxringold 18:35, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the support! As for the referencing for Boy Scouts... I'll take a look, though which way do you want them? For example, if you had a ref #5, then went 6-7-8, then called back to 5 again, do you want it numbered as 5 in the text, or as 9? Staxringold 18:46, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Nevermind, I think I got it. Staxringold 18:48, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Wood Badge
Not only is "WB" scouting only, it's BSA only! Stick to your guns. :) --JohnDBuell 20:40, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Regarding the category changes - I believe the system is hierarchical - picture it like a family tree - so "Wood Badger Wikipedians" is a subset of the "Scouting and Guiding members" category (and they're actually linked to each other), so there's no need to list it in both places. I don't really know much about Guiding, so I don't know what to say, but I think that's what the disagreement was about. -Rebelguys2 00:02, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay, that makes sense. I honestly know next to nothing about Guiding and only a passing knowledge of Wood Badge. Anyway, I still have a bit of copyediting to do, though classes started yesterday, but I think it's undoubtedly already gotten the support to be a FAC, so it shouldn't be an extremely pressing issue. -Rebelguys2 00:06, 19 January 2006 (UTC)


 * If there is still a problem with the categories, just keep using as many websites as necessary as references. ;) But I would agree that it should specifically be a subcat of Scouting, NOT Scouting AND Guiding. --JohnDBuell 01:24, 19 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Not a bad idea, then the proposed usage should be a lot more clear. --JohnDBuell 02:34, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

John: Wood Badge is used in more than just the USA. I know that the UK and Australia have it, and there are probably more. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 13:24, 19 January 2006 (UTC) WB is used in many countries around the world. See msg on Gadget's talk page. Rlevse 13:25, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Scouting
Hi. I have moved this page into the Wikipedia: namespace, where all pages that are not directly encyclopaedia content are placed. Cheers, [[Sam Korn ]] 14:57, 19 January 2006 (UTC)


 * To be honest, I'm not really sure how that template works. You'd probably be better off asking at the Help Desk.  [[Sam Korn ]] 15:09, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Scouting
Rle, you are doing a great job moving everything from our collaboration page to the Wikiproject page and reformatting it to a useable form etc. Keep up the good work. Earlier today I started digging through the 'pedia trying to tag Scouting articles with the template. I got quite a few of them but there are still a hell of a lot left out there I know. I'll continue doing this the next few days, it will give us a handle on what articles are already out there. I read through some of the ones I was tagging - there are A LOT of World Scouting articles that seem, incorrectly, BSA-centric that we will have to work on. And there are A LOT of Scouting articles that need a lot of restructuring, formatting and basically an all-around over-haul because their quality is so poor. Hopefully, this new Project will help us find more interested users to aid us with the large task ahead. Keep up the good work! --Naha|(talk) 21:40, 20 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Randy, you're the man! That is a tremendous amount of work on your part and will serve to unify, codify and improve all the scattered Scout articles spread about the Wikipedia!

Thanks for taking my Follow Me, Boys! note and running with it, that's great! I had forgotten Kurt Russell was in it.

And finally, congratulations on your merit badge article success! Your brother in Scouting, Chris 23:35, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

ps-Randy, check out User:Kintetsubuffalo/workshop/Gallery of Scout and Guide national emblems, and see if the idea has merit. YiS Chris 22:02, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

pps-give a look at how Template:WikiProject Indiana links to all articles just by the addition of the template, would that be desirable? It seems like it might be positive. Chris 22:30, 26 January 2006 (UTC)


 * No, I don't like that at all, for two reasons: A) it includes everything, even talk pages, and B) puts them all in one cat, which makes it harder to find articles. Rlevse 22:37, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

MB FA!
Finally! Yay! Third time's a charm I guess? --JohnDBuell 20:03, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

After the first Merit Badge Collecting title, we renamed it to Merit Badge Types - so did Raul allow it to stay up there the WHOLE time while all the kinks were worked out? I'm IMPRESSED. --JohnDBuell 21:53, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations on your Featured Article! I went ahead and removed your addition to the dab on top of Merit badge (Boy Scouts of America); while it's good news, articles should never disambiguate to, refer to, or even mention anything Wikipedia-related, unless the article itself is Wikipedia-related. Regardless, congratulations again! -Rebelguys2 23:26, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations on the Featured Article! You have worked very hard on this and other Scouting articles and it shows :) Congrats also on the barnstar! --Naha|(talk) 04:53, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Criteria
I reworked the criteria for Talk:List of Eagle Scouts a bit. Take a look at: User:Gadget850/Sandbox2. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 17:44, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

I like that! We're adopting it. Rlevse 17:49, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. We should do something similar for any article that needs some sort of specific guideline. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 18:03, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

United Nations
Please check out my comments here about the United Nations.evrik 17:09, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

The United Nations
Are you going to be upset if I add this language, or a version of it back into the pages in question?


 * The WOSM is the non-governmental organization (NGO), that represents the Scouting movement at the United Nations. The World Association of Girl Guides and Girl Scouts has General Consultative Status with the Economic and Social Council ECOSOC of the United Nations.


 * pitch a fit is aggressive language. The united nations info only belongs in the WOSM and WAGGGS individual article, not every single article dealing with WOSM or Scouting. Chris 17:56, 24 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Aggressive? Hardly. My apologies to those who might have been offended. ;-) I just want to make sure that I get my language approved in advance from othr twitchy-fingered users. One in particular deleted all my contributions this morning because they didn't believe what I was writing was factual.evrik 18:02, 24 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Evrik: The sample paragraph above is fine in the WOSM and WAGGGS articles as those organizations perform that role. Pls do not include in general Scouting articles as that is not applicable there.  Pls also use the ref/note system.  Thank you from the Scouting WikiProject coordinator.  I was merely trying to mediate a disagreement in that role and in a neutral manner. 18:05, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I'll go and add them back in. Thanks. evrik 18:09, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Scouting Barnstarn
Did you see this proposal? Scouting Barnstarn --evrik 19:44, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Not before, but there is a Wiki Merit Badge. For this one, I think the scope should be bigger. See the page you put it on. Rlevse 19:54, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Scouting Barnstar - Where to put it?
I believe that the award that was created for the Scouting Barnstar should be a topical award. Scouting is a world-wide movement that has served youth in many countries for more than 100 years and represents the youth of the world at the United Nations.

It has been suggested that the award be given as a PUA. The first line on the PUA page reads, "This page provides a collection of awards created by individual Wikipedians." The Scouting Barnstar was created by the WikiProject Scouting.

Currently, the is a discussion going on at Wikipedia_talk:Barnstars. Please comment there if you are interested.evrik 17:01, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

The debate has raged while I sleep on the other side of the world as usual. I am confused about the difference between the different kinds of barnstars and awards. There seems to be considerable objection to what I think is the topical award. Several Projects have PUAs. If that is the easiest way forward, go for a PUA. Since you convene the project, I suggest you cut through the nonsense and just accept what is possible in the quickest way. Barnstars are no big deal. We all have better things to do. Regards, --Bduke 21:07, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Traditional Scouting
I like this page in many ways, but I came away rather confused. I'm not sure who are traditional Scouts. Are they people in the BPSA or the WFIS, or are they people inside BSA, Scouts Canada, etc.? The web links you provided did not really help either. Am I just being dumb as I have just got out of bed? --Bduke 20:12, 24 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I have the same question. I sent a few emails to find out.  I think it's just a movement, with no parent organization.  I'm trying to find out.Rlevse 22:00, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Update: I just got good info on this and will be updating it today. Rlevse 11:14, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Great. I've just done a mass of small edits, putting articles in the Scouting cat, and so on. It is nearly 11.00 p.m. in this neck of the woods so I'm off to bed. --Bduke 11:55, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Image Tag
Hi. If you find an image without a tag you can add the no source tag to it and then add this tag to the uploader's talk page: Image:ImageName.jpg --~. For more information, see Untagged images. Oh, and thanks for the thanks. I hope I wasn't too blunt when you first joined. It's nice to see your progress. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 15:28, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Scouting Stub Templates
Where can I get a full list of all the various stub templates for scouting? I know the main one, but there are sub category stub templates too I have seen on several pages, just wondering if we have them all listed in one place? --Naha|(talk) 04:35, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

New enthusiast needs guidance/rapid lodge lists
Randy, User:Robhmac is going wild creating Scout lists, they are being added to AfD as soon as they are created, can you please introduce him to the Project?


 * Randy, I'm going home and staying off this tonight as I am coming down with the 48 hour ebola. There goes my weekend.

1) I am suspending the Bronze Wolf and World Committee stuff for a while, the state article thing seems more imperative right now. I have gone ahead and done three test articles, for anyone to improve, as right now they are just adds-back-in of other articles. I used Alabama 1) as alphabetically first; 2) as it had no links so no one would complain if I moved it; and 3) as a scarcely-visited article, we can test and modify as seems appropriate to us. (As to the clip I borrowed from the controversy page, some states just don't yet have a lot of unique things I know about them, and for that my apologies). I then tried to set an example merging my own Colorado and Hawaii articles into new state pages.

2) please note the vandalism and butchery of Scouting in Canada and Scouts Canada by 207.6.53.202 (I hate anonymous users), as well as Norman Rockwell by 69.37.100.105, have you figured out how to auto-revert, without cutting and pasting? (You see it a lot, reverting vandalism back to version x)

Good night and have a nice weekend, YiS, Chris 03:37, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

I have reverted Scouting in Canada as the anon user had just taken out stuff that should be retained. However Scouts Canada is more complicated as the anon user made changes that might need to be kept, although some sections that were removed do need to be put back. --Bduke 04:29, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Reverting is easy, you call up the history page, click on the date time of the version you want to restore, edit it (it'll give you a warning), then save it. Jergen fixed Scouts Canada and I fixed Norman Rockwell. Yes, the state articles seem more pressing. Rlevse 11:18, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Saturday night followup

 * 1) when their homestate can be ascertained, what about links in the state articles to "notable Eagles from x" or "notable Scouts from x"?
 * 2) when the stub mergers will start going through, it says "Please request a page move on Wikipedia:Requested moves if you cannot do so, but please do not just copy and paste the contents (doing that destroys the page's edit history)." How do we get it to merge with the history intact?
 * 3) we need to define what is keepable versus mergeable. My vote is a paragraph or two are stubs and therefore mergeable, a three or more paragraphs makes a page and is definitely a linker.
 * 4) I am giving up on that User:Robhmac guy, if his info is of that little import to him such that he won't write back, it will be rebuilt by later interestees. I simply don't have the time or intertest to cut/paste it all or fight his battles for him. Looks like that vote to delete is going to win.Chris 03:03, 29 January 2006 (UTC)


 * 1) Sure, but make it a section in the state article, not a separate article


 * yup, that's what I meant. I always favor keeping things in the state articles unless it becomes so huge as to overwhelm everything else.


 * 2) To merge with history intact, make the merge from a redirect, the history will stay intact; paste the contents into the page being merged into. As far as I know, the edit history is only trashed when the page gets deleted.


 * drool strings. I suck at the back-scenes stuff at Wikipedia, I still can't make that "revert to previous edition" you tried to teach me work. Might need your help when we get there.


 * I made revert work! Thank you, brother!


 * 3) agree, plus something that could be bigger, like the Boys Life article


 * That I am totally for, it looks like a good stub, and could nicely be tied into all sorts of Norman Rockwell and other goodies.


 * 4) agree

Rlevse 03:09, 29 January 2006 (UTC)


 * We have another one who's not got their eye on the ball. Please check out the discussion at Scouting in Maine. Chris 21:19, 29 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Re Maine: Let's keep our eye on that one. Rlevse 22:04, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Please adopt your state
Thanks, Randy! I have now completed the transition from state list to articles on Scouting in each state. Please help fill in some blanks at Scouting in Virginia! Thanks, YiS, Chris 09:03, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Randy, did I misunderstand? I thought we were merging Councils into states. Tidewater looks great, truly, but I thought that was the whole point of what I just changed everything to. Please let me know. Chris 18:36, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Re: Wisconsin's FAC

 * Actually, its not "irls" its "n’s". This illusion is the result of the apostrophe between the "n" in Wisconsin and the "s" after tle apostrophe. This is needed to denote ownership, ie "whose bow? Wiscosnin’s bow", only when Wisconsin is written in itallics the apostrophe appears to catch the "n" in wiscosnin, making it look like its misspelled.
 * Nauticus now has its own article. Its a stub, but the red link is now out of the Wisconsin article. TomStar81 04:32, 27 January 2006 (UTC)


 * OK, I changed my vote. Rlevse 11:16, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

BSA tighten
Randy, on the BSA main article, it says "Councils, which range in size from two small West Virginia counties (Mountaineer Council) to all of DC and much of Maryland and northern Virginia (National Capital Area Council)."

Are we going by Council membership statistics? (if so, they should be found and highest/lowest chosen)

Are we going by geographic area? If so, then there are two smaller yet councils, only one city-Piedmont Council in California and Greenwich Council in Connecticut-unmergables that have fought BSA to retain their historic place. Then there are ones vaster than NCAC-Aloha Council spreads over much of the earth's surface in the Pacific, and the largest by land area is Transatlantic Council, encompassing most of Europe.

For your perusal. YiS, Chris 00:52, 29 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't know how to find such a statistic. Whomever wrote that blurb (it's been there awhile and is also in the Scouting in Virginia article) had to have used number of youths enrolled.  We could mention it by both enrollment and geography. Rlevse 01:02, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Scouting Portal
Hi, I think you should put the template below the article's main infobox/image instead of at the top. It seems to mess up the positioning of infoboxes when placed at directly on top, and I think it looks better just below the images.&#160;—  The KMan  talk  19:07, 28 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure I follow, but I did change it from a graphic bar to word bar to see how it looks.Rlevse 19:12, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Regardless, the Portal looks amazing! Nice work! -Rebelguys2 21:35, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Oops!
Dear Rlevse, I'm embarrased about my lack of response to your message from two weeks ago. It simply slipped by my attention among another edits at my talk page, and I honestly didn't observe it until now. I see that you have already added your Undisputed (film) article to our WikiFilms project, which is great. Again, I'm sorry for not noticing your message until now, and if I can be of any help to you, please just let me know... I swear I will answer this time! =) Kisses, -  Phædriel   ♥ tell me - 22:03, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Scouting Categories
Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I voted. ;) --JohnDBuell 23:13, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Raney nickel FAC
Hi there. I've fixed the references according to WP:CITE, including inline citations. It would be nice of you if you could provide additional feedback on this nomination. Thank you. -- Run e Welsh | &tau;&alpha;&lambda;&kappa; 04:14, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

agressive editing of Scouting article
Randy, I think LARS went overboard in taking out information on the Scouting article, could you give it a look? I am concerned about recent unilateral changes made to articles made by non-project members, would like to know if you have similar trepidation. Chris 19:46, 29 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi, I simply was bold. I found the See also section way to long and this way at least something changes. It is ok and not surprising to me, that somebody wanted some specific links kept. But this way I could find out, which links have some support und which haven't. I tried to discuss this ages ago on the discussion page, which simply was ignored. I don't think it a good idea to have thousands of See-also links, because this way their significance is not clear: much better to link them with context in the article.
 * Now to more specific points. Scouting starts with the sentence and link "Scouting is a worldwide youth organization." That is why I find another link to youth organization in See also totally superfluous. And Eagle and Queen's scouts are only relevant to their respective associations and not to scouting in general.
 * I won't change these things against your stated opinion though and I hope still for good collaboration. YiS, LARS 12:45, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Category war
Thanks for letting me know about Categories_for_deletion I'll be sure to vote on these issues. Have a good one! Dustimagic *\o/* (talk/contribs) *\o/* 21:21, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Rlevse,

Thanks so very much for supporting the recent FAC of Cheers. It was successful and Cheers has been promoted! I'm looking forward to hopefully getting Cheers on the front page. In the mean time, please accept this Beer as a token of my gratitude. Cheers! Staxringold 11:59, 30 January 2006 (UTC) (UTC)

Bronze Wolf on smaller country stubs
Randy, I wrote this extensive explanation I left yesterday for you at my talk page, you didn't apparently get it, so I am reprinting it here.

See Bandalag Íslenskra Skáta about a Bronze Wolf. Rlevse 12:08, 29 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Randy, good catch, but it was me that put it on there. Here's how I am working it.


 * If someone already has an article, I put the notation and category link on there.
 * If someone already is mentioned in an existing article, I make them a full article as noteworthy.
 * If someone is not already mentioned elsewhere, and there is a last name disambiguation page, I put notation of them on the disambiguation page.
 * If the national Scouting page is a stub, I put mention of their award directly on the page to bulk up the stub, as the award alone does not make them noteworthy for an article.
 * I have only done the BW thus far. As I go down the list for the World Committee, I find several that are both BW and WC, and _that_ makes them noteworthy for an article. At that point, I go back to where I have mentioned them, the disambig page or the national page, and create a stub article for them. But as I say this was put off since doing the state articles. Chris 17:43, 29 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Also, how do I archive a talk page? Chris 16:56, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Open the talk page for edit, cut out the part you want to move, then just call up your talk page (not in edit mode), put a slash at the end of its name in the address bar, and give it a name. Hit enter, it'll ask if you want to make a new page, do so, and paste in the moved talk. See the top of my page for an example.Rlevse 18:34, 31 January 2006 (UTC)


 * ps-please check out Talk:Venturing (Boy Scouts of America). Chris 17:15, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree he shouldn't have said "unknown persons" (it's not that hard to figure out and you are one of the key contributors and I sympahthize with your response. But I also think that when anyone proposes a merge, you should state a reason and start a discussion. Rlevse 18:32, 31 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Understood. As I was going through tagging the stubs the other night, I had to do over 50 of them, and I have limited computer time as mine is in the shop. I needed to get through all orphans I found and tag them appropriately, and have been going through and putting why after. Chris 19:02, 31 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I had forgotten this was out there Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Philmont Scout Ranch

Scouting portal
There's no way to change the link color, unfortunately; it's the default MediaWiki external link color on every portal. —Kirill Lok s hin 23:43, 1 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I just found out that there may actually be a way to do this. If you're willing to subst: the basic box-header code and maintain it yourself, you can apparently do things like this.  I wouldn't necessarily advise it, though, as losing the changes to the base template isn't worth it, in my opninion. —Kirill Lok s hin 00:38, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

BSA articles

 * Please see User:Gadget850/Sandbox3: this is a proposed outline for the BSA division articles.  *User:Gadget850/Sandbox2 is  a proposed outline for Boy Scouts of America. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 00:15, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
 * BSA outline:
 * Learning for Life is down the page a bit, and Exploring is a sub-progam thereof.
 * Added Lone Scout and Lone Cub Scout.
 * American Indian Scouting Association is a BSA/GSUSA program.   :Pls be sure you mention it's a joint venture of BSA/GSUSA. Rlevse 12:39, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't know if you noticed Boy Scouts (Boy Scouts of America)} as a proposed article. This is because of the useage of BSA at both the national and the troop level.  The current Boy Scouts of America is quite confusing on this. I did, but I'm not sure where you're going with this. Rlevse 12:41, 2 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I tried to make sense of the BSA categories: User:Gadget850/Sandbox. Now I know why I was a bit confused. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 12:34, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
 * BSA National High Adventure Bases is a currently a subcat of Boy Scouts of America and of Boy Scout reservations. This is why I got confused. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 12:40, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Arthur Eugster
Okay, sheepish grin, I didn't expect there would be more than one such named famous person. Should we make that into a disambig page? Chris 04:23, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
 * What's the article name of the other person? I can't find it. Rlevse 10:57, 2 February 2006 (UTC)


 * There's not, it's two guys with the same name, one the politician and one the Scout. I thought I was creating an article for one person, turns out he's _two_. Oops.


 * Let's leave it alone and worry about it when and if the politician ever has an article.Rlevse 02:59, 3 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Also, would you please check out the edit war on Scouting? Our friends from the east are sure insistent they are right, when they've not been engaged in the Scouting WikiProject dialogue previously. Chris 23:48, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Scouting DYK
My mistake; yes, I meant the BSA Jamboree. It's interesting how little I know about anything outside the BSA and OA. - Pureblade  | Θ 17:49, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Controversies about the Boy Scouts of America
There has been severe deletion on this page by one or more parties. Comments that were made by you, me and others have been removed. Normally, I would just do a typical revert back to the last "known good version" - but there have been new comments/posts since all the deletion - and if I reverted the deletion, it would also remove the new commentary which would also be bad. Removing other people's comments on talk pages is considered vandalism, and I'm not quite sure what to do. Conversations are to be preserved, not deleted, and not vandalized.

I was going to revert back to the last good version and then paste in the new stuff people had added, but I kept getting it all out of order and it was going to turn into a mess :(  Deleting other people's comments on talk pages really gets under my skin, even if they are comments from someone else that I disagree with - you just don't mess with that. Any suggestions? --Naha|(talk) 21:21, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

I suggest find an older page with the comments and save it as a subpage, then mark it as an archive. You are right- talk page comments should not be deleted, just archived as the page fills up. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 21:28, 5 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks Randy, thanks Gadget. --Naha|(talk) 21:34, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Oh Randy, my comment wasn't really about how to report anon users suspected of vandalism etc - I do that all the time. What I was really needing help on was how to revert this particular type of vandalism (where there have been comments made since deletion) without losing other people's new comments. I'm in the process of reporting them now though. Thanks --Naha|(talk) 21:39, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

High Adventure category
I'm not completely sure what you are referring to regarding the high adventure category. However, what I assume you are talking about is the proposed name change. I think "BSA national high adventure bases" is more correct than "BSA National High Adventure Bases" as in most BSA publications it is not capitalized. When I created the category I capitalized it by accident. If you think it is correct as it is then please let me know so I can remove it from the name change list. Thanks and good job with all of the Scouting articles. Dustimagic *\o/* (talk/contribs) *\o/* 22:00, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, it should be Boy Scouts of America national high adventure bases Dustimagic *\o/* (talk/contribs) *\o/* 22:15, 6 February 2006 (UTC)


 * How about High adventure bases (Boy Scouts of America)? See two emails I sent.Rlevse 22:23, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

AS best I can tell, the bases are administered by the BSA High Adventure division.--Gadget850 ( Ed) 04:10, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Toolbox
As I find useful WP guides and templates and such, I've been dumping them into User:Gadget850/Wikipedia. You might find it useful. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 14:12, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Very interesting, thanks. Rlevse 14:16, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Scout Image Tag
Thanks for your help. I actually have no idea whether the image that I borrowed from USSSP is even ok to post to Wikipedia, and mostly I was hoping that someone could clue me in on that issue. I saw your message, but don't really understand how that works. Please advise. NThurston 16:50, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks again. There is definitely a steep learning curve on this culture which is different than the culture in our in-house Wiki. NThurston 16:50, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Wittig
I'm not sure I get it. The monument (not only the socle) were for airmen vets of the WWI and the Polish-Bolshevik War. The Germans came in 1939 and dismantled the sculpture while leaving the socle. Hence there's no sculpture on the 1942 picture, while there is the sculpture on a 1935 pic and 2001 pic. Does it answer your doubts? Or perhaps it should be reworded? Halibutt 13:19, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Uma Thurman FAC
Your objections with the article have been fixed. --Fallout boy 22:03, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Main Page
Today's featured article/February 22, 2006 &mdash; Very cool! &mdash; Rebelguys2 talk 21:51, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you! You noticed it before I did!. Rlevse 22:30, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Nice job :) --Naha|(talk) 22:34, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

National FFA Organization
Just curious why FFA falls under the Scouting Portal. I was heavily involved in FFA and Scouting, and do not believe there is an obvious connection. NThurston 22:49, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Because they are youth development organizations. I think at the time, it was on a list of similar orgs and I just followed it. Notice 4-H is in the same category: "Non-aligned organizations".  The others in that group are definitely tied in to Scouting for various reasons (like YMCA, for historical reasons).  I you feel the FFA and 4-H do not belong under the portal remove the portal link.  I think it would be okay to leave the Project tag on the talk page, though, what do you think? Rlevse 22:59, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a good approach. I will remove portal link, but leave project tag.  NThurston 23:11, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

re Syrcatbot
I can, but at the moment I am at work and don't have access to the computer that runs syrcatbot. :/ If it can wait until tonight then I can do it, or you might check with User:Kbdank71. He runs the same software, but does it under his account instead of a bot account.

Did you already nominate this for a speedy rename on WP:CFD? I don't know why someone would object, but if you haven't you might post it there and link to the discussion on the scouting project.

Let me know. Thanks! --Syrthiss 17:27, 14 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Ok, I'll get it tonight. --Syrthiss 17:43, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Scouting/Gold Award
Hey Rlevse:

Happy to be of assistance. I've been a Girl Scout for 13 years now, worked as a Girl Scout Summer Camp Counselor (in high school) recently joined as a Venturer, and will be working on as the first Space Port Program Director at Camp William B. Snyder in Prince William County, VA in it's inaugural summer. [\http://www.boyscouts-ncac.org/pages/18_camp_william_b_snyder.cfm.\ Camp William B. Synder].

I have earned my Gold Award, and was somewhat bemused to see three Eagle Scout User boxes, yet no Gold Award. :) To be honest, I want to find an actual image of the Gold Award it self, then the Girl Scout Logo which is the current image. I'm thinking about to sending an email to some Girl Scout colleagues in the Girl Scout Council of the Nation's Capital about image usage for the Gold Award User box.

If you have any questions, or need some help, fell free to ask. I have access to most of the major Girl Scout handbooks.

Zidel333 03:22, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

WBBeads Image
Do you have a 3-bead image? If so, I would like to create a userbox for Wood Badge Staffers. NThurston 17:08, 16 February 2006 (UTC)


 * No, I don't, 204.113.19.8. Also, you should get an account so your name isn't an IP address.Rlevse 17:11, 16 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorry. Didn't realize I wasn't logged in. NThurston 204.113.19.8


 * Ah, now I'm more inclined to help. I detest anonymous users. I'll look when I get home, but I honestly don't think I have one. Rlevse 17:15, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

I checked at home, and no, I do not have a 3-bead image.Rlevse 11:05, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Image:ArrowheadBW.jpg tagging
I've retagged this image. You placed a pd-self tag on this image. This image is a derivative work of Image:OA-logo.jpg, and thus it is not public domain. The logo tag applies. As a consequence, this image's use in User Arrowman is not allowed under the terms of fair use. I have removed the image from the template. --Durin 20:53, 16 February 2006 (UTC)


 * That is not the OA logo not the sash logo and it's not the same color. You guys worry way to much about this stuff.  I'm removing the OA box from my page because no one can come up with a logo that looks good and doesn't upset the tag Nazis.Rlevse 21:33, 16 February 2006 (UTC)


 * PS. The time of the admin's would be far better spent stopping vandals.  Like, why do multiple people have to spend the day reverting main page vandalism everyday when all they have to do is protect the main page FA. Rlevse 21:53, 16 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I know it can be frustrating sometimes, but you should try to keep cool and stay civil. Calling people "tag Nazis" could be considered a violation of the WP:NPA policy. You're a good user and I wouldn't want to see you blocked over something so silly. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 21:57, 16 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Get blocked over this? I've seen far, far worse that NOTHING was done about.  Rlevse 22:00, 16 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, maybe that was a bit melodramatic. :) But you should still try to stay cool. ;) --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 22:03, 16 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Wiki's biggest strength, joint editing, is also is Achille's tendon.Rlevse 22:08, 16 February 2006 (UTC)


 * You're not the first to suggest that the main page featured article be locked. Often, the first article that newcomers to Wikipedia see is that front page article. As what is, effectively, a representation of Wikipedia as a whole, we don't want to hide the fact that Wikipedia is open for anyone to edit &mdash; and we do see good edits. In addition, vandalism is certaintly a priority for administrators, but, honestly, it doesn't happen that much. I'd say that an average of five admins patrolling the recent changes list at any time is sufficient to revert all blatant cases of vandalism. If you watch a recent changes list, you'll see that anonymous users aren't just vandals &mdash; they make a lot of good, solid contributions. &mdash; Rebelguys2 talk 22:54, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I totally disagree. The main page should be protected--the FA gets vandalized repeatedly and almost always by anonymous users.  Almost all vandals I've seen are anon users; probably becuase they feel they can hide behind it, which is why I think all users should be required to have an account.  How can you say vandalism doesn't happen that much -- at least with the main page FA, it happens multiple times a day.  Vandals and anon users also cause a lot, if not most, of the problems on Wiki.  Rlevse 23:00, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Almost all vandals are anonymous users, but not all anonymous users are vandals. Having to register is an extra step that will certainly turn off visitors with only a passing or no knowledge of what the site is or how it works &mdash; just look at the websites for newspapers, and the subsequent rise of www.bugmenot.com. Vandalism really doesn't happen often enough to require all 804 administrators to work on reversion, and it's true that nearly every vandal leaves after he or she has been warned. In addition, vandals' work is easily reverted with the touch of a button, and easily blocked. The real problems, in my opinion, are the registered users that repeatedly return and act within, but breaking the spirit of, Wikipedia rules against POV, edit warring, personal attacks, and the like. &mdash; Rebelguys2 talk 23:10, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * The additional problems you mentioned are certainly of note too, but we shouldn't have to worry about fixing vandalsim in the first place and as for the main page FA, is someone who logs in and sees his/her first FA on the mainpage in vandalized form getting the best image of wiki? The main page article should be protected--today's article was hit at least ten times.Rlevse 02:27, 17 February 2006 (UTC)


 * The image in question, Image:ArrowheadBW.jpg, is a derivative work as I noted. I base this on the fact that the image is a reduced size image of the logo from the BSA website . You will note that the image referenced at the site is labeled "oalogo.gif". While the arrow shown in Image:ArrowheadBW.jpg is indeed a different color than, the arrow is the same, if only smaller. The arrangement of the white areas on the arrowhead on each image is identical. The relative proportions of each image are identical. The angle of each image is identical. The designs of the arrowheads of each image are identical. The image at is protected by copyright. Please see BSA's copyright statement. Under copyright law, derivative works of a copyrighted image are copyrighted just the same as the original image. Therefore, the derivative image that you created based on BSA's OA logo are protected by BSA's copyright. Fair use policies dictate that such images may not be used for the purposes you intended it to be used. Please note that at Userboxes it states, "The use of copyrighted work as fair use is not allowed on templates". This isn't being a "tag nazi". This is protecting Wikipedia against copyright infringement lawsuits. I am sure you can appreciate the potential hazards such lawsuits present to Wikipedia, which is a volunteer organization run on donations. I hope this adequately explains the matter to you. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact me. If you'd like, I might be able to create a logo for your template that would in fact be public domain. Interested? --Durin 00:59, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
 * No thank you, I'm not interested in the template anymore, but I'm sure someone else is.Rlevse 02:27, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and created a replacement image anyways, and have included it on the template. Have a look at User Arrowman. --Durin 15:32, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I do appreciate you trying, but I honestly don't like it. The alternating dark/light colors make it hard to read the "OA" letters. Rlevse 15:34, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Do I at least de-qualify as a tag nazi? :) I did the letters that way because I wanted to get the arrow in, but also have the letters noticeable. That's very hard in 46x49 pixels. So, overlap was a virtual given. But, with overlap, either the arrow or the letters would obscure the other. Thus, the intermix... --Durin 16:20, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Sure. There has been lots of editing, experimenting, etc going on with this userbox's image.Rlevse 16:58, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

re: WP:AIV
Regarding: User:207.200.116.70, I commented here as to them only having 2 edits today. This IP appears to belong to a dynamic proxitized host, AOL. I did watch the use contribs for a few mins, and did provide (via the delisting comment) that they may be relisted if persisting for action. Test templates and WP:AIV are GREAT tools, and had they had more then the two edits today I would have blocked. xaosflux Talk  / CVU  03:19, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Sure we disagree, that's what started this conversation :) While that account does have other warnings on their page, it has been identified as AOL, and the other warnings are not recent, it is likely that the warnings didn't go to the same person just to the same account.  As difficult as it is to deal with sometime, we do get good edits from anons as well.  I may have acted a little to quickly in clearing that notice, and will give it more time to be reviewed by other admins before delisting next time.  xaosflux  Talk  / CVU  03:32, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Re: Portals
I don't think we have a formal "Featured Portal Director" yet, but Cyberjunkie has been promoting them so far. You might want to leave him a message, since I'm not sure how often he checks the candidate page. —Kirill Lok s hin 16:00, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi Rlevse. As Kirill noted, there's nothing formal as with featured articles, but I informally fulfil the same function as does Raul. I established featured portals and help keep it running. Of late, I've been busy off-wiki and have thus been limited in that capacity. I'll have a look at the Scouting Portal and see if I can spot any faults. --cj | talk 00:45, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Images, userboxes, etc
Take a look at Durin's edits today, especially what he did to userboxes. He's on a "fair use in userboxes" campaign. I noticed your exchange with James S. over the. Can you explain how it's okay to use this image and not the ones Durin removed from userboxes? It makes no sense to me whatsoever. Rlevse 19:49, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
 * He's not taking the time to analyze whether each image is fair use. Something like that would simply take too long &mdash; there are hundreds of thousands of images. However, the images that Durin are dealing with are already labeled fair use. Therefore, whoever uploaded the image has already asserted that the images aren't free, which makes it obvious that they're something we can't have in userboxes. Taking the time to examine the veracity of each claim to an image tag is a completely separate job altogether.
 * Honestly, you and Durin both seem a bit heated right now. He's certaintly never done anything malicious, but I can understand where you're coming from. You needed to ask him to help you determine what tag belongs on what image &mdash; not ask why he didn't do something, as he has no obligation to do everything on Wikipedia. By phrasing the question the way you did, it seems like you're accusing him of being biased. As a result, his shortness with you at the end is also understandable, though certaintly a little rude. People have questioned my image copyright and other policy decisions, and I've been called stupid, a racist, and a bigot. I've been the target of threats, racism, and wild accusations ranging from my participation in beastiality to the likelihood that I will massacre dozens of people in the future. Apparently, I hate Native Americans. I'm sure he deals with the exact same thing from some of these decisions he's made, and isn't inclined to duel it out with everyone who responds, especially when it seems that he's being accused of something.
 * The image that you mentioned still falls in a grey area. The opposing side's final rationale was that uncopyrighted trademarks can be used for non-commercial purposes &mdash the problem, however, is that Wikipedia doesn't allow images with a non-commercial purpose clause. Honestly, though, all of the personal attacks, assumptions of bad faith, and accusations of breaking nearly every Wikipedia policy on my part just made me throw my arms up and walk away. Someone who's willing to put such time and so much legal jargon of a supposed loophole &mdash; even wrongly &mdash; is, of course, going to convince the majority who knows nothing of copyright law. YiS &mdash; Rebelguys2 talk 23:01, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I know; I figure it's easier to prevent a heart attack or something of the like just by leaving and doing something else around here. Maybe I'll wait to fight the good fight when I have some time between my spring and summer semesters. ;) &mdash; Rebelguys2 talk 23:31, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Philmont box
I subst.'d the 4 userboxes I had after noticing a massive purge affecting other editors userpages. If you want to move the Philmont one, that would be fine (I was considering moving it to my user namespace but am a little confused about whats going on). L 1AM (talk - 'tribs.) 11:06, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for keeping an eye on things. ;) L 1AM (talk - 'tribs.) 11:14, 21 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I unsubst'd the 4 boxes and they seem to be working. Feel free to edit my userpage at any time though - it belongs to the Wikipedia project, not to me. L 1AM (talk - 'tribs.) 00:51, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

American haters
What is the proper process to complain about userboxes done with a user's own code (not a template from a userbox page) that is POV and slams a group? Specifically, check out User:Liftarn. He's made his own "Unamerican" and "America is a police state" boxes. I highly doubt asking him to remove them will be successful. I can't find these on the userbox pages--his page has it's own code. Rlevse 16:16, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
 * You can find user page guidelines at User page. As far as I can tell, people generally vote against horribly POV and divisive userboxes. Like you said, however, it's not a userbox template &mdash; it's just something on his own page. It's certainly polemical. I don't know what to tell you. &mdash; Rebelguys2 talk 00:33, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Regarding the message you left me about this. As long as the wikicode exists on his userspace and it is not a template, he is not breaking any rule that I know of. The WP:NPOV policy doesn't apply to the userspace. I suggest leaving him be. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 16:49, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Blocks
You blocked 194.66.199.249, but there is not blocked tag on his/her talk page. Could you add one? Thanks for blocking this repeat vandal. Rlevse 15:00, 22 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Sure. Thue | talk 15:03, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

FA protection
Protecting the main page FA is a horrible idea, IMO. It is policy to never protect anything on the main page. The reason is that we wish to encourage people to edit. When someone who is new comes here, the first thing that they will probably click on is the main page. If they find that they can't edit it, they will get put off from Wikis. There are people who are deveoted to vandal fighting. We have mulitple IRC channels wiht bots which report suspicious edits. Protecting the main page FA is un-wiki and creates worse problems than you seem to think it solves. The main page FA has multiple people watching it at any given times. There are other... which would be much harder to keep track of. &mdash;WAvegetarian TALKCONTRIBSEMAIL 19:33, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I will have to respectfully disagree. I understand the concerns regarding vandalism to it, but I also feel that saying, "Welcome to Wikipedia whre you can edit everything, except for the articles we're shoving in your face," is bad. I also think that one of the best wqays for people to get involved is if they see an article, like the FA, that they know something about. They see something that they can improve and do so. The scouting article is a great example: yes, there was a ton of vandalism, but many people have been involved with scouting and probably read it. Like the wiki model in general, it provides a net gain. In reference to my second sentence above, I meant that articles linked to from the main page aren't protected. This debate is a long standing one which has been going on at Talk:Main page and in various fora related to FAC for a while. &mdash;WAvegetarian TALKCONTRIBSEMAIL 00:36, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Vandal
Vandalising the Featured Article for the day is never a good idea. The vandal placed himself on watch for that action alone. He's gone for a 24 hour period. Let me know if they return using another ip. Thanks for your alert. -- Longhair 22:59, 22 February 2006 (UTC)


 * There are many views both for and against protecting the main page and linked articles. The Main Page itself is protected, however the subsections aren't, such as the Featured Article and other content. Administrators have very useful tools to revert vandalism as they see it, and blocking tools to deal with repeat vandalism, although one doesn't need administrator rights to combat vandalism, it helps when it's on a large scale. I've added the article to my watch list and will keep an eye on it for any bad faith edits. Of course, we trust good edits will occur as well. -- Longhair 23:09, 22 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep reporting them. We see them daily, and they're easily dealt with. The personal attacks are mostly aimed at whoever is catching them out at the time. My own userpage is sometimes vandalised often in the course of a day when vandal fighting in a big way. Never take it personally. -- Longhair 23:15, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Operation On-Target
I am sure there are many people out there that know much more that me, and was hoping for someone else to adopt it. I couldn't find a place for "articles that need adoptive parents" so I thought that perhaps someone would see it there. If there is a better place, please move it, but let me know so I can get it right next time. Thanks. NThurston 23:30, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Spoof MB and Bart
Check the Bart Simpson bit added to the spoof mb section of our mb article. What do you think? I have mixed feelings about if it belongs there. YIS,Randy Rlevse 18:09, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree that it seemed a little off-topic and was poorly written as well. I just removed it. &mdash; Rebelguys2 talk 23:53, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Reform
Wikipedia began as an open effort to create an encyclopedia of the people, by the people, for the people. Sadly, its bureaucracy has put an end to those goals. To this end, we must promote a peaceful revolution to reform it. We must eliminate the undue influence of certain people and remake Wikipedia as a people's encyclopedia. We, the reformers, are led by TJWhite who endured only briefly before suffering an indefinite block. Visit his user page to see our ideology, roughly outlined. I for one do not condone his call to vandalism. Instead, by using the power of the people, we can reform wikipedia. Join us to recreate an encyclopedia where all are equal; an encyclopedia that does not strive to become Brittannica, but rather seeks to be a one of kind encyclopedia for all of the people of the world. Please pass this message in some form to as many people as you can. Secondly, petition for the unblock of TJWhite, the one who began our glorious movement. Finally, link to his page from your user page and express your sentiments for reform on your page. Thank You, fellow wikipedians. LaRevolution 15:31, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Robert Baden-Powell – broken redirects
I don't really mind which title the page is at, but your last move has broken some redirects by creating double ones. For example, Baden-Powell now redirects to Robert Baden-Powell, 1st Baron Baden-Powell which redirects to the article. When you move a page, you are promtped to check for double redirects, so please do so when you move pages in the future. JRawle 14:47, 26 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, I could see what Proteus had been up to. I can see arguments on both sides as to where the article should be, but just for daring to suggest he might be best known as Robert Baden-Powell, Proteus saw the need to be rude to me. Therefore I have deleted it from my watch list and won't be editing the article further. Sorry if I seemed to accuse you of breaking things. Good luck in sorting the title out! JRawle 01:19, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Lodge List by State
RE: Articles for deletion/List of BSA local Order of the Arrow (OA) lodges
 * Finally got around to putting the deleted material into each State's page (i.e., Scouting in Georgia) Got a lot more states to do. Not sure how to notate this on the discussion for deletion page, or where that should go. The Georgia page was a mess. The defunct council names were listed right under the prior entry's district list. I also had a lot of material from a prior author, rather than just a list of lodge names, that I wanted to make sure was preserved. I'm still very new at Wiki style, which why I haven't done more to contribute. Robhmac 01:52, 27 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I'd just say keep working state by state as best you can. Let me know if you have more questions. Rlevse 11:03, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Peer review
I have nominated Cub Scouts (Boy Scouts of America) for a peer review, and I welcome your comments. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 16:16, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Scouting in Puerto Rico
Umm... Chris 02:06, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

I didn't see Ed's change, what concerned me was the interesting melange of English and whatever, and the attempt to tell the whole history of Scouting on that page by the vigorous but unWikified user. Chris 01:56, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

that afd
Hi Rlevse, Thanks for your note, I have come to have a lot of confidence in your sense of reason and fairness. No, we have no problems you and I, but the topic is explosive and it drives people to a high pitch. Nevertheless, I am very heartened by the way things are going, minor hitches and all, and I think that we will reach a workable solution. If I was not endlessly optimistic I would not be here doing this work. I for one feel enriched by the process - I come thinking to teach but end up learning instead. Be well, Haiduc 05:37, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Slacker
What are you doing?Coffeeboy 15:05, 28 February 2006 (UTC)