Jump to content

Talk:Eagle Scout/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2

History

I think a bit of reorganization of the history material would be better presented as:

History

  • General
  • Requirements
  • Medal
  • Badge
  • Other insignia

--Gadget850 ( Ed) 16:35, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

How about making it in your sandbox first so we can compare them? Rlevse 17:36, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Check out User:Gadget850/Sandbox2. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 19:34, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

OK with me.Rlevse 11:45, 1 January 2007 (UTC)


Blood Drive As An Eagle Project

I was noticing in the examples for Leadership projects, one of the examples including running a blood drive. The blood drive itself does not totally count as leadership since the blood center self-corinates (its a matter of picking a phone and asking them to be at place for a time and date, nothing else). I bring this up beacuse another scout in my troop did a blood drive a few years ago. After the scoutmaster confence (and a jackass stunt at school), the scoutmaster tried to revoke that sign-off, to no-avil. Ever since, this scoutmaster has been cracking down on possible eagle canidates (including me). Just my two cents. KB1KOI 23:07, 10 January 2007 (UTC) (soon to be Eagle scout,currently pending BOR)

So whats the point here? Do you have a question or are you just stating something? --Joebengo 23:36, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

We have had one Scout do a blood drive in my troop. I wasn't his mentor (and I can't give blood... moo), so I'm not sure exaclty what was involved, but I do recall that he promoted it to the point where they had to turn away donors. So, yes- it is a legitimate example. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 23:46, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Blood drives are possible as Eagle projects, but the Scout has to set it up so he shows leadership--the reason people frown on them is that it's easy for one not to do much at a blood drive. NOw, if the SM already approved it, he can't unapprove and he's not the final sign off anyway as the district adv chair is. Rlevse 01:16, 11 January 2007 (UTC), a district adv chair
This is My understanding, and I am by no means an authority. As far as I know, Blood Drives are frowned upon as Eagle Projects because they don't require as much leadership from the Candidate as most other projects. However, they, as I understand, as much less frowned upon for Scouts with Special needs, or the mentally/physically handicapped. I don't believe this is official policy, but that is what appears to me. I DO NOT KNOW THIS FOR FACT. The blood drives I have seen though required the scout to recruit X number of donors and get the word out and coordinate that. Again, I don't know any of the above as fact, but this is what I believe from talking to, and listening to people. Maybe it's local/unofficial/personal opinion. God I Hope I disclaimed that enough. Dachande (talk) 14:45, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Correct, most district adv chairs frown upon them for that reason. — Rlevse • Talk • 14:49, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Similar awards in other organizations

Didn't we have the Billy Mitchell award here at one time and remove it? Ditto for the Royal Rangers and some other non-Scouting groups. While I can appreciate that other organizations describe their awards as their equivalent to Eagle Scout (which makes Eagle more notable), this is going to drag out like the Scouting awards list did.

I think that if editors want to compare their award to Eagle, then it should be done like we did with List of highest awards in Scouting. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 13:14, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Agree with gadget. Rlevse 18:45, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Merge

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

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

Merge Eagle Palms into Eagle Scout

As noted, this merge has effectively already been performed- this is a pro forma notice. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 13:55, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Please oppose, support or comment:

done; Redirects in articles fixed. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 01:02, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Pins

"The Eagle Scout Mentor pin was introduced in early 2004 in a gold-plated version, and was changed in early 2006 to pewter to match the mother and father pins."

The pin shown on ScoutStuff [1] has a gold color, but is not gold-plated. Also, the mom's pin was redesigned at some point [2] to match the [3] dad's pin. These are not pewter, but "antique finish". The mom and dad pins are also available in sterling.

The Eagle Scout Award Kit [4] seems to show all three pins in a silver color. I will try to take a photo of the current kit this coming weekend. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 16:21, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

The kits had gold (gold colored) mentor pins at first, but then pewter ones for the last year or so but the last few I bought had gold color ones again. Not sure why.Rlevse 16:46, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
It is back to gold colored. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 00:53, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

I got a good photo of the current Eagle Scout Award Kit- should this be added? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gadget850 (talk • contribs) 13;32

If there's a good spot for it. Did you notice the mentor pins were gold, pewter for a year, then gold again? Rlevse 15:30, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

My brother made eagle, his ceremony was Saturday, 9-Feb-08. He gave me the mentor pin which was gold colored. I'd never heard of/seen them before and I made Eagle in 1999, but have been involved in Scouting since...I have attended Eagle COHs since 1999 and my bro's ceremony was the first time I'd ever seen a mentor pin. They also apparently did away with the father tie tack? Dachande (talk) 13:59, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

advanced U.S. military rank for Eagle Scouts

Apparently the army no longer offers an immediate rank advancement to all Eagle Scouts who enlist, but still fast track them for advancement. Any one have a source on this? Boatman666 01:52, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I deliberately wrote this as "may receive advanced rank" to deal with differences between the service. I never found a reference for the --Gadget850 ( Ed) 03:30, 25 March 2007 (UTC)Army- let us know if you find one.

The only source I have is that when one of my friends (who is a fellow Eagle) entered the service he was promoted 2 weeks out of boot camp while another Eagle was not, he inquired and his CO told him that Eagles get special consideration but that they are no longer able to give the defacto promotions due to a law suit. Boatman666 05:31, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I have a friend from high school and scouts (a fellow Eagle) who just recently this year enlisted in the Marines. He told all of us that his enlistment said he would leave basic training as a PFC. I don't know if this will actually happen, but the different services may deal with this issue in different ways. MBK004 05:51, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

I have a fellow Eagle friend who recently enlisted in the U.S. Air Force and upon graduation from basic and tech school at Shepherd AFB he was given an additional stripe. He was told that this was due to his Eagle Scout rank. Falcofire 15:11, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Cool. This is in the article, see "Eagle Scouts who enlist in the U.S. military may receive advanced rank in recognition of their achievements". Consider joining the Scouting project. Rlevse 15:19, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

The US Army website states that: "We value our Eagle Scouts and Girl Scout Gold Award recipients, and are pleased to offer them an opportunity to join the Army at an advanced rank in recognition of their accomplishments." (http://www.goarmy.com/ycr/) So it looks like it's still valid. Lordjeff06 12:17, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Guestbook

We should put a guestbook thing up so Eagle Scouts can leave their signatures. That would be nice. Falcofire 17:23, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

(New discussions go to the bottom of the page; use the + tab at the top to create a new section.)
/
There is no place for that in an encyclopedia such as Wikipedia. I'm sure there are any number of forums where that could be done. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 18:00, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

There seem to be places for signatures in articles relating the further of science and the expansion of that article. If volunteers to help expand articles have room for a signature why not official Eagle Scouts? It is perfectly plausible and sensible. Falcofire 17:01, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

What article? How does this help an encyclopedia article? --Gadget850 ( Ed) 17:26, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Why revert?

Just curious as to why my edit making the reflist two columns was reverted. I've seen this on several articles. It makes the ref section more presentable, rather than a long list with large amounts of white space to the left. I've never seen anyone oppose such a change before. Wrad 03:46, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Do you really need to put this here and on my talk page? See your talk page. You didn't explain either. 2-column refs are less presentable and harder to read. I've seen multiple disagreements over this, most NOT involving myself.Rlevse 11:08, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

I just wanted to see if other people agreed or disagreed with the change. I never said (on this page) anything about not explaining anything. I'm just bringing the issue up and asking what the pros and cons are. In my reading, studies have shown that columns make things easier to read for most people, as it is easier for the eye to follow a shorter line of text than a longer one. I just want to know what people prefer, as I've never run into an opposing argument before. Putting it on your talk page only makes the issue visible to you and me, and keeps others out of it. Wrad 15:39, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

This is a matter of style. I prefer the single column myself. When you click on the reference link in the article body, it pops down to the reference and highlights it; this works better with one column text in my opinion. We had this same discussion when the article made the main page a few months back. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 17:29, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Okay, just wasn't familiar with any opposing arguments. I'll just keep that in mind. Wrad 17:58, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Infobox and images

I am soliciting opinions on using the standard infobox. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 18:24, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

1,835,410 as of the end of 2005. I just added the reference- I know I added this number, but can't figure why I did not have this referenced. If anyone can find the numbers for 2006- the 2006 Annual Report is a bunch of fluff. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 19:49, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Since there are no other comments, I am going to update this image. Please note that this is going to orphan the current images.

If there are no objections, I am going to update the other images used here to convert them to .PNG format and rename them to a common format. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 13:57, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

I have updated all of the images to PNG format with a common name format, a common size and a bit of cleanup. If there are no objections, I will tag the old images as orphaned so the bot doesn't start dropping messages. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 16:41, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Passive vs active

I came across this page and saw

Since its introduction in 1911, the Eagle Scout rank has been earned by more than 1.7 million young men.

in the lead. Could this be changed to

Since its introduction in 1911, more than 1.7 million young men have earned the Eagle Scout rank.

without loss of substance or style?

Regards, Kushal

PS: I wanted to be extra careful since it is a lead paragraph of an important article. --Kushalt 21:46, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Go for it. This is a style refactor; but active is better than passive for this. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 21:51, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Eagle Scout Leadership Service Project merge

Eagle Scout Leadership Service Project was forked back in July, but has failed to be expanded. There is really no merge to be done, just redirect.

You do realize that the article is just a duplicate of the section in this article? --— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 15:57, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Yes, but we can strip the second two paragraphs from the main article. I like the fact that the focused article has so many links. These get lost on the larger article. --evrik (talk) 16:14, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Closing, merge failed --— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 16
38, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Naming Eagle Scout Classes

Tuscarora Council, based out of Goldsboro, NC, just recently started naming Eagle Classes after a distinguished Eagle Scout. The distinguished Eagle is usually an Eagle who is a member of the local community and who has made major contributions towards some cause. The 2007 Class of Eagles was named the J. Louis Maxwell Distinguished Eagle Class. Has anyone else heard of local councils naming their Eagle Classes? I think this is a great tradition and one that should be more widely practiced.
Falcofire (talk) 17:36, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Nope, BTW, I used to live in Goldsboro from Cub to Second Class Scout. — Rlevse • Talk • 19:01, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
No, we just use the years. --— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 20:26, 1 February 2008 (UTC); (Eagle Scout class of '76)

Tradition?

Has anyone ever heard of a tradition involving given an Eagle Scout a silver dollar (the one with the Eagle landing on the moon) at his COH? The district Exec gave this to my brother and his friend at his COH Saturday (9-Feb-08) and acted like it was a time honored tradition since the dawn of scouting, but no one in my troop had ever heard of it. The DE gave speech about the significance of the LEM being named the EAGLE and how like 75% of astronauts were involved in scouting and like a 1/3 were Eagles. (Statistics not accurate, used as an example). Anyone ever heard of this? And would it be worth including in the article?Dachande (talk) 14:07, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

To state the obvious: The "dawn of Scouting" is 1907, but the lunar landing was in 1969. This sounds like a local or personal tradition. Our previous Scoutmaster used to give a Scouting coin to new Eagles. There is something of a U.S. Army tradition that a newly promoted first lieutenant is to give a silver dollar to the first enlisted soldier who salutes him. Another military tradition is the challenge coin. There is no standard practice here, so I don't think this needs to be included. --— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 14:53, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Good

good —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.131.101.232 (talk) 13:02, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

--- This article reads well, and is very informative. Being an Eagle Scout myself, I believe that it should be mentioned that only %2 of all scouts become Eagles. Seanmichaelcouch (talk) 04:48, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

At the end of the History section. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 10:54, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Award revocation

There is no mention of how one might lose the honor of Eagle Scout. The top of the article mentions the quote "Once an Eagle, always an Eagle", but the distinction can be revoked if an Eagle Scout is convicted of a felony. Has anyone found good source material to write a section on award revocation? Unicycle77 (talk) 23:26, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

"A Scout badge is a recognition of what a boy is able to do, not a reward for what he has done"— *Advancement Guidelines. Boy Scouts of America. 1977. (this is the copy I happened to have at hand). I'm not aware that there is a process for any award to be revoked. "Once an Eagle, always an Eagle" really refers to any number of Eagle Scouts who might state "I was an Eagle"; this is incorrect, as they would always be an Eagle Scout, or Life, Star or any of the others. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 23:52, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
I've not heard of this, losing your Eagle for a felony. Do you have a sound reference for this? — Rlevse • Talk • 00:50, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

The only case I've ever heard of an eagle being revoked of rank in any way was a case where an eagle scout announced to being an athiest (apologies if I spelled that last part wrong but what I mean is one who believes that there is no god) However, this happened quite a few years ago, and I am not sure if the revocation actually went through or if even he might have been sending it in as a protest. I however remember having to write an essay on my religious belief's (as far as I recall what It actually said didn't matter as long as I didn't reject the idea that god or god like figure(s) existed.8.25.243.16 (talk) 23:11, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

BSA does not revoke medals once they have been approved. A valid source will need to be provided that says otherwise. It is possible to get an application turned down, but they don't revoke them after they are awarded other then maybe for obvious fraud in the appliation process or something like that. Yes, people have returned their medals, but that is by their own choice.Marauder40 (talk) 14:43, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
See Advancement Committee Policies and Procedures (PDF), Boy Scouts of America, 2009, ISBN 978-0-8395-3088-6, 3088— there is no procedure to revoke an award. I am not aware that the BSA has expelled atheist or agnostic youth. The BSA seems to now use the WOSM policy of treating youths who declare atheism as being in a stage of development and experimentation. See Talk:Boy Scouts of America membership controversies/Religion. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 16:11, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

NESA history

NESA has a new Eagle Scout history;[5] it is pretty nice, except that the author is confused on the appearance of skill awards. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 13:42, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Advanced Rank upon enlistment

I know we've already got this line: "Eagle Scouts who enlist in the U.S. military may receive advanced rank in recognition of their achievements.[32][33]". I've found some more about this for the article. On the back cover of the most recent Eagletter (those in NESA get this), there is this blurb:

Military Services Seek Eagle Scouts
It's no secret that Boy Scout training is invaluable to young men who choose to join the military. That's why America's armed services let recruits who are Eagle Scouts enlist at the grade of E-2. In addition, recruits may be eligible to enlist at the grade of E-3 if they've earned the Eagle Scout Award and meet certain additional criteria, such as having earned 24 or more hours of college credit.

Here's the citation for it (see the markup): "In Brief". Eagletter. 34 (2). National Eagle Scout Association: 24. 2008.
I'll leave it to those who've written the article to integrate this better than I can. -MBK004 02:13, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

That's a tweak in the rule. It may vary from service to service too. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:18, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Controversies Section

The controversies section references a Philadelphia Inquirer article appears to be biased. The article states that "scouts, gay and straight, have returned their badges." It gives no examples except for one case. This does not justify the plural language used suggesting a mass renouncement. I also question the reliability of the Inquirer's article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DMGTN (talk • contribs) 03:35, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

A quick search will show similar articles with other names, the Inquirer article was probably one of the more neutral; this is balanced by the BSA statement. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 12:01, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Two million

Unofficial sources put the 2008 Eagle census at 52,025 for a total of 1,990,905. Estimates are that the two-millionth Eagle Scout will be awarded between 5 and 10 March. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 21:37, 23 February 2009 (UTC)


You got that from me, and I in turn got it directly from the BSA national office - Jeff Laughlin who works there gave me this info on 23 Feb 2009. The 1990905 is the results of my adding that information into the previous spreadsheet using the document I had gotten from Jeff last year for ALL previous years numbers. It can be considered official. The 10 March exstimate for the 2 millionth Eagle is also from the National office. The 5 Mar is my estimate, but both are just estimates based upon the 52000 rate and the day of the year. Mycroft_514

Hi! By unofficial, I mean we don't have a reliable source other than word of mouth; we need something in print or web. Given the turnaround from National, the 2ME is probably already in the paperwork chain. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 19:35, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

 Done ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 15:51, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Youngest

1911 - 1924 unknown

Time Period Last name First name Date of Birth Date of Eagle Age at Eagle Troop Council Citation
(1924-04-01)April 1, 1924 to (1958-09-15)September 15, 1958 Hubbard L. Ron (1911-03-13)March 13, 1911 (1924-04-01)April 1, 1924 13 years, 19 days
13 years, 14 days 		Troop 10 Washington DC. "Was Ron really the youngest Eagle Scout in the US?". Documents of a Lifetime:The L. Ron Hubbard Papers. 12 Dec 1996. Retrieved February 18, 2009.
(1958-09-15)September 15, 1958 to (1998-03-10)March 10, 1998 Wheeler Jack (1946-11-09)November 9, 1946 (1958-09-15)September 15, 1958 12 years, 310 days
12 years, 10 months, and 6 days 		Troop 7 Glendale, California [6]
(1998-03-10)March 10, 1998 to (1998-03-30)March 30, 1998 Voelker Nathan C. (1985-08-23)August 23, 1985 (1998-03-10)March 10, 1998 12 years, 199 days
12 years 6 months and 15 days 		Troop 1155 Anaheim, California [7]
(1998-03-30)March 30, 1998 to present Bell Zac (1985-11-05)November 5, 1985 (1998-03-30)March 30, 1998 12 years, 145 days
12 years, 4 months @ 25 days 		Troop 51 Gillette, Wyoming [8]

Raw stats from website[9]

  • L. Ron Hubbard, Troop 10, Washington DC.
On April 1, 1924 @ 13 years and 14 days
Youngest Eagle Scout: 04/01/24 - ?
  • Jack Wheeler, Troop 7, Glendale California
On September 15, 1958 @ 12 years, 10 months, and 6 days
Youngest Eagle Scout: 09/15/58 - ?
  • Timothy A. Knotts, San Diego California
On December 15, 1973 @ 13years, and 25 days
  • Mark Harrison, Troop 59, Fort Valley Georgia
On October 20, 1976 @ 13 years and 22 days
  • Nathan C. Voelker, Troop 1155, Anaheim California
On March 10, 1998 @ 12 years 6 months and 15 days
Youngest Eagle Scout: 03/10/98 - 03/30/98
  • Zac Bell, Troop 51, Gillette Wyoming
On March 30, 1998 @ 12 years, 4 months @ 25 days.
Youngest Eagle Scout: 03/30/98 - ?
  • Michael Bentzein, Troop 1155, Anaheim California
On August 20, 1998 @ 12 years, 11 months, and 6 days
  • Thomas Boyle, Troop 748, Lakewood Colorado
On December 5, 1998 @ 12 years, 7months, and 18 days
  • Jake Tobin, Troop 51, Gillette Wyoming
On February 18, 1999 @ 12 years, 8 months, and 7 days
  • William McLaughlin, Provo Utah
12 years, 9 months and 9 days
My own son made Eagle at 12y, 9m, and some odd days. That was in 2004. So no way was Hubbard youngest ever. Maybe the youngest at the time, but no way these days. I think it's just so much COFS propaganda. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:38, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
And the email rejected, so that page is not being maintained. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:48, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
I can prove my son's but it would not be wise to put his name, dob, and Eagle date on wiki. ;-) — Rlevse • Talk • 18:04, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Join at 10 years of age
  • Tenderfoot for 1 month— requires physical record of 30 days
  • Second Class
  • First Class for 4 months
  • Star for 6 months
  • Life for 6 months

So— the bare minimum for the current requirements is 11 years, 5 months. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 20:46, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

That's under current rules, the rules haven't always been the same. — Rlevse • Talk • 20:53, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Where is this going? Being the youngest or oldest does not confer the notability required for inclusion on this list. If there were any reliable sources, we could mention it in the main Eagle Scout article as we did for the millionth Eagle Scout. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 15:14, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Badge images

I'm forking this from Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_review#Non-free_files ...

Wikipedia standards have changed ... the current standard is no fair use galleries period. It's a moving target, but that's where it currently is and it's only a matter of time before they get expunged.

In the case of anything on there first used before 1923, the badge itself is public domain and if there is no copyright notice anywhere on it, anything first published before 1978 is probably public domain, though there might be special rules here (I don't know if the notice has to be physically on the badge or if simply including the notice in, say, the certificate that they mail along with the badge would be sufficient).

IMPORTANT DISTINCTION: the badge itself is public domain, not any random photograph of it. Pictures of 2D objects (like photocopying a page out of a book, scanning an old photograph, photographing a painting) are NOT copyrightable under SCT rulings, but a patch or a badge is 3D (albeit just barely) so if you take a photograph of a badge, you have created a separate copyrightable work - it is a "derivative work" of the badge, but is considered a creative work in and of itself.

For the ones where the badges themselves are in the public domain, if they are scanned/photographed/whatever by someone who releases their work into the public domain (or under the GFDL, etc), we can use them as free images. At the very least, that means find originals of File:Eagle Scout badge (type 1).png, File:Eagle Scout medal THF1.png, File:Eagle Scout medal D&C1.png, and File:Eagle Scout medal ROB5.png, scan/photograph them, release the scan/photograph under the GFDL/CC/etc and we can use it. If it can be reasonably demonstrated that there is no copyright notice, that applies to any of the badges/medals that are pre-1978 - find an original, scan it in, and we can use it.

For ones where the badges themselves are not in the public domain, it's highly unlikely they are going to be able to stay (except for the current badge, which I would say is obviously a legitimate fair use). --B (talk) 17:48, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

If this was only a trademark issue, I would agree, but the BSA (and GSUSA) badges and emblems are also protected by congressional charter:

§ 30905. Exclusive right to emblems, badges, marks, and words

The corporation has the exclusive right to use emblems, badges, descriptive or designating marks, and words or phrases the corporation adopts. This section does not affect any vested rights

[10]

The protections afforded by the charter have been invoked by the BSA, most especially in the trademark issues that lead to Wrenn v. Boy Scouts of America.
I just updated the rationales for all of the images here— the badges were originally uploaded by Dep369 and the medals by Rlevse— we can verify the sources from them. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 18:05, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 18:05, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia accepts free images even if they depict protected trademarks, eg File:Coca-Cola logo.svg. Our only issue is one of copyright, which necessarily under the constitution has a limited term (see Copyright Clause). --B (talk) 19:00, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
Copyright? These are protected by trademark and charter; registered trademarks don't expire. Eagle Scout is trademark 73307667, first use in 1911, searchable through TESS. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 19:32, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
Yes, but copyright and trademark are two different issues. Wikipedia uses images that depict trademarks without requiring jumping through hoops. We do not use copyrighted images without jumping through them. If I take a photo of something Scouting-related for which the copyright has expired or which makes nominal use of the trademark, eg, a photo of uniformed Scouts, I, personally, own the copyright to that photograph. Nobody can use it without my permission and the BSA has no rights to enjoin me from using it UNLESS I am using it in some way that diminishes the value of the BSA trademark (eg, framed prints of Eagle badges to hang on your wall). Wikipedia does not use images in any way that infringes on trademark rights and so we will host images that depict a trademark. --B (talk) 20:08, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
What is currently ref 24, "Grove, Terry (2004). A Comprehensive Guide to the Eagle Scout Award (Twentieth Century ed.). pp. 10-170. ISBN 097765348X." is where I got all my images from, except for the Robbins5 medal, which is a pic of my own personal Eagle medal. I'll update the image source info. — Rlevse • Talk • 01:10, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Glenn A. and Melinda W. Adams National Eagle Scout Service Project of the Year Award

Looking for a non-primary source before adding this:

The National Eagle Scout Association is pleased to announce that due to a very generous gift from the NESA president and his wife, they have approved the creation of the Glenn A. and Melinda W. Adams National Eagle Scout Service Project of the Year Award. Each council NESA committee will have the opportunity to select their Council Eagle Scout Service Project of the Year Award recipient, who will then be considered for the Regional Eagle Scout Service Project of the Year Award, and the Glenn A. and Melinda W. Adams National Eagle Scout Service Project of the Year Award. The national award will be presented at the National Annual Meeting.

---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 18:41, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

I never heard of this. — Rlevse • Talk • 22:44, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
It was just announced through my DE. Not even listed on the BSA or NESA sites, but on a few council sites. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 23:07, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Now listed at NESA.[11] Will work this in later.

Explorer Silver Award

This is awkward:

The Eagle Scout and Explorer Silver Award are the only Boy Scout ranks that are recognized on an adult Scouter's uniform as knots. The knots are worn as an adult recognition of the youth award as a red, white, and blue striped square knot of different designs

Silver has never been a rank and it is certainly not a Boy Scout rank; and yes, Boy Scout can ambiguously refer to the BSA or the Boy Scouting section. Why do we need to bring Silver into this? ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 12:54, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, that info is incorrect. If all BSA is included, then there is also the Arrow of Light, Exploring GOLD, and Venturing Silver. I have reverted the changes as extraneous and incorrect. - IanCheesman (talk) 20:49, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

History of the medal

The pictures of the Eagle Scout medals do not correspond to the verbage in the paragraph on the "History of the medal". Fourth Paragraph: "In 1933, BSA was removed from all the Eagle Scout insignia, including the medal. In 1955 the obverse of the eagle pendant was made flat so it could be engraved." These two sentences are correct. However, the pictures of the of the Eagle Scout medals next to the paragraph on the History of the medal shows an Eagle Scout medal dated 1920-1978 with a BSA on the eagle, and shows a medal dated 1955-1969 without BSA on the front of the eagle on the medal. THESE PICTURES ARE MISLABLED. Sources: Hanging in my office are my father's and my Eagle Scout award. My father earned his Eagle Scout medal in 1934 and it does not have BSA on the eagle in the medal and it has engraved feathers on the back. I earned my Eagle Scout medal in 1962 and it has BSA on the front of the eagle and the eagle has a flat shiny back". Douglas Fir Green (talk) 00:48, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for catching that— the images were out of order. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 15:03, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

I am assuming that this is a work in progress. I visited the website this morning and see that there is no Eagle Scout medal shown for the period 1920-1954, and the incorrect picture is posted for the date 1955-1969. If you give me an e-mail address I can send you a high quality picture of my father's 1934 Eagle Scout medal and my 1962 Eagle Scout medal. I notice that the stitching on my father's 1934 Eagle Scout medal (which doesn't have a BSA on the eagle in the medal) is slightly different than the stitching on the Eagle Scout medal without the BSA on the eagle currently shown on the website. If you want me to take a picture of my father's medal I will make sure that the double knot is hanging properly. The double knot on the medal without the BSA on the eagle in the medal shown on the website is all bunched up which is not a proper way to display this medal. Douglas Fir Green (talk) 16:33, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

"Only" President?

I'm pretty certain I recall contemporary sources stating that Bill Clinton was an Eagle Scout back around when he was first elected. Now, whether the BSA later rescinded it or not based on his conduct I don't know, but I'm pretty certain he received it. 加持 (talk) 05:31, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Ford is the ONLY President who was an Eagle. Clinton was only in Cub Scouts. JFK was a Star Scout. For more see List_of_notable_Scouts#Boy_Scouts_of_America and List_of_Eagle_Scouts_(Boy_Scouts_of_America)#Incorrectly_regarded_as_Eagle_Scout; so if you saw something that said Clinton was an Eagle, it was simply WRONG. — Rlevse • Talk • 09:58, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
More at Talk:List of Scouts/List of Presidents of the United States involved in Scouting. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 15:51, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Obama

I removed the statement about Obama's signature. This appears to happen whenever there is a new president due to a delay in signature authorization. See http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/eaglescouts.asp. In the long run, this isn't notable or important.

---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 11:35, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Well Obama certainly took longer than most to start signing them. — Rlevse • Talk • 12:04, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Still not notable. We have not documented the date began by any other president (or have we?) as it does not add value to the article. Its only purpose in the article would be as an axe to grind. Bakkster Man (talk) 12:50, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
I have been looking over forums, newspapers and the like, but there is nothing on this for other presidents. I would not be surprised to see that Nixon's signature remained through 1974. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 13:26, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
You can call it WP:OR but personal experience in being an advancement chair tells me Obama took longer than most to make the change. — Rlevse • Talk • 18:02, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
I think the issue is that it provides no encyclopedic purpose, and its primary intent is as a dig at Obama. Note WP:UNDUE, we spend only one sentence in the entire article mentioning that the US President signs Eagle Certificates, and only 4 sentences including that one discussing the Certificates as a whole. Any delay by the sitting PotUSA in signing Certificates does not seem to be worth spending 20% of the Certificate section discussing. If the section were longer, perhaps it could be discussed, if there was a valid argument that the discussion was WP:NPOV. Perhaps usage of WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV, again if there were an argument that there was encyclopedic value. That requires someone prove it is notable beyond the purpose of criticism of Obama (see WP:SOAP). Bakkster Man (talk) 21:25, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Citations in lead section removal

I have removed the citations in the lead sections, because they were redundant and the manual of style advices us not to use them here only if strongly needed (WP:LEADCITE).
Sincerely, NikitaUtiu (talk) 10:41, 30 July 2010 (UTC).

High use of NFCC

I'm curious to know why this FA article appears on the "pages with excessive NFCC" list with 17 non-free images(most or all seem to be images of badges)? I went through the FA review and saw some discussion about it, but can't see how it was resolved. I then checked the current version of the article at the time FA status was granted - June 2006 - and found that all the NFCC images were gone. Were all the NFCC images removed to pass FA muster, then added back in later or what? Or were the NFCC images replaced with free ones? Any long-time editors know what the process was? Thanks.Shirtwaist (talk) 11:23, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

All of the badge and medal images are tagged as non-free. Some of the older versions are probably out of copyright, although still protected by trademark and congressional charter. I could merge the grouped images into one image which would technically reduce the number of images.
I use Anomie's linkclassifier script: it color codes links and adds a red border to non-free images. To install it, add this to Special:MyPage/skin.js:
importScript('User:Anomie/linkclassifier.js'); // Linkback: [[User:Anomie/linkclassifier.js]]
importStylesheet('User:Anomie/linkclassifier.css'); // Linkback: [[User:Anomie/linkclassifier.css]]

See User:Anomie/linkclassifier.css for a list of the link colors. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 13:16, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

I don't think trademarks are an issue as far as badges being depicted for encyclopedic purposes in WP, as stated previously in the FA review by an admin. Copyrights of photographs of badges, however, definitely are. The reason I ask about this is that it's hard to believe a Featured Article can get away with having the second highest non-free-image count of all FAs - History_of_merit_badges_(Boy_Scouts_of_America) being the highest FA with 23 non-free images! I noticed there are quite a few FAs out there with 13 or less non-free images in them. Is there some cut-off point in WP:NFCC for FAs?
If they were all deleted just to get the article to FA, then added back later, shouldn't the article have its FA status reviewed?Shirtwaist (talk) 08:22, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
As long as featured articles use any NFCC, won't some featured article always "get away with having the second highest non-free-image count of all FAs"? DickClarkMises (talk) 15:34, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
It's all relative, of course. If all FAs had, say, 5 or less NFCCs, the highest or second highest wouldn't be "getting away" with anything. An FA with 23 (or 17 NFCCs) - the highest count of ALL FA articles, only 12 WP articles have higher NFCC counts! - does seem to be clearly violating the NFCC policy - which is much more strict on FAs than other articles. That's why I was curious about the "cutoff point" for NFCC concerning FAs. A Featured Article with 3 NFCC images is obviously not equivalent to [12] with 23, is it? 17 NFCC also seems excessive to me. If 17 wasn't excessive, why were they all deleted just before the article was granted FA status? Nobody seems to be addressing that question.Shirtwaist (talk) 21:36, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Number of Boy Scouts

The number of Boy Scouts mention in the right corner is incorrect. The correct number is 837,343 as refernced by "AtGlance" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Torpedo475 (talk • contribs)

That number is not in this article. It is in Boy Scouting (Boy Scouts of America), but as noted it is for troops and teams. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 12:54, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Badges

I know that the BSA and Eagle Centennial patches are real (I'm getting the 2012 one in November), but should they be consideration a new type of ealge patch or just a notable variation of the 1989-2010, 2011 one (It currents says that there are nine kinds that counts one of the Centennial ones)? -Dracuns (talk) 12:56, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

The BSA centennial and Eagle Scout centennial badges are considered separate variations.[13] ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 14:54, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Eagle Required Merit Badges

I found this article about some changes to the Eagle Required list[14]. Sustainability will be a brand new merit badge introduced at the 2013 National Jamboree, and will be an option instead of Environmental Science. Also on January 1, 2014, Cooking will become Eagle Required again. This will increase the number of Eagle Required Merit Badges to 13, but keep the number of merit badges for Eagle at 21. I added this information to the article, does anyone think we should remove it until we get closer to the date of the changes. - Dracuns (talk) 03:27, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

I just had not gotten around to add it. I cleaned up things a bit. BTW: the BSA publication is Scouting, The Scout Association publication is Scouting Magazine. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 09:11, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Palms

I was just looking at the article, and I think that Palms would fit better under After becoming an Eagle Scout. — Dracuns (talk) 17:20, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

After is more about later in life; palms are more a continuation of Eagle Scout. --— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 00:28, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

References

Reference 41 is no longer a live link; the only reason I have posted so on the talk page and not simply fixed it myself is because I assume there must be a better way to update this than setting ref. 42 to be ref. 41, ref. 43 to be ref 42., etc, etc. If you know of a way to do this, by all means please tell me, and I will gladly remove the dead reference. k2trf (talk) 06:26, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

 Done Link updated. The references auto-renumber themselves if you add or remove one of them. I would advise against removing a dead link references however. It is possible, as was illustrated by this case, that you can find the updated link with the existing info. Cheers. EricSerge (talk) 14:09, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

See WP:DEADREF and Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners. --— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 14:38, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
Facepalm. Thanks! And thanks for the links, knowledge = power! k2trf (talk) 15:28, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Presidential signatures

The only outlet to report on Clinton's signature being removed, as far as I can tell, is WorldNetDaily, a heavily-biased source of questionable veracity. Do we have any other means of verifying this information as true? Thargor Orlando (talk) 18:04, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

[15] [16] Searching for more. --— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 20:19, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
This appears to be an individual protest, not a "the president no longer signed certificates from 1999-2002." Worthy of note? Thargor Orlando (talk) 20:34, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
I am not overly concerned with keeping this. I think this crept in with some stuff about Obama not signing certificates, which is not true. I recall chopping all that out. --— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 14:36, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
Sounds good. As you were the one who had reverted me before, I'll move forward and remove it. If there's further discussion, I'll continue watching for it. Thargor Orlando (talk) 15:50, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Controversy

The data on Eagle Scout Badges returned is over 10 years out of date. Can someone knowledgeable on this topic update this to reflect current/recent events? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.124.138.84 (talk) 21:36, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

We aren't a newspaper, so we don't need to have every latest breaking news bite; see Wikipedia:Recentism. Wait a bit and let it develop. For those who aren't keeping up...[17] And Time notes Bill Gates as an Eagle Scout.[18] And there is no such thing as a former Eagle Scout. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 22:16, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Thats strange I normally I heard Bill Gates was a Life Scout, his father William H. Gates, Sr. is an Eagle Scout. In fact Bill Gates said that his biggest failure was that he was a life scout. I looked at that article and it is misleading, it said that he earned the highest award for service to youth, which is the silver bufflo. -Dracuns (talk) 12:51, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
From Bill Gates: "...the Silver Buffalo Award by the Boy Scouts of America, its highest award for adults, for his service to youth." This has nothing to do with Eagle Scout. His service to you involved the The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.[19] ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 14:53, 2 October 2012 (UTC)


Someone keeps removing any referrence (with citations) to the fact that the change in policy toward gay scouts has created a schism with some charter members. This is a CENTRAL element to the current form of the controversy, and deserves to be mentioned in this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.10.249.43 (talk) 16:27, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

I would be one of those someones. The organization of TLSUA has no connection to the Eagle Scout Award. It was formed in reaction to the policy changes by the BSA (although they seem to be have the same policy on gay youth) and is already noted in Boy Scouts of America membership controversies which is where it belongs. And "a number of Eagle Scouts" in this instance appears to be two. --  Gadget850 talk 16:44, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Missing images

This article is a lot uglier and less informative since the images went missing. --evrik (talk) 04:57, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

It appears from the discussion last year that the concern was to protect the rights of those who had photographed the awards. I've inserted two award images into the article that are not fair-use but are hosted on Commons. —Eustress 21:38, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Palm requirements

I'm not sure if this should be added, but there is currently a missing requirement for palms; this being the board of review (different from conference with unit leader). (It is done within the unit like other ranks, unlike that for the Eagle Scout award itself.) Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.97.181.96 (talk) 19:07, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

FAR needed

There is uncited text throughout (not all of it tagged), the WP:LEAD is inadequate, there are prose issues (sample, repetitive additional, "Additional recognition can be earned through Eagle Palms, awarded for completing additional tenure, leadership, and merit badge requirements."), WP:REALTIME issues (current, etc), and other MOS issues. Is anyone able to restore this article to FA standards, to avoid a Featured article review? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:27, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

This sort of discussion never ends well. Delist it and be done with it. -- Gadget850 talk 20:44, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
Well, actually ... they often end with improvements and restored status. All it takes is for someone to engage. (From WP:URFA, have a look, for example, at Talk:Actuary, Talk:Tenebrae (film)#FAR needed, or a lot of work needed at Wikipedia:Featured article review/New Jersey Devils/archive1 ... all are just about over the hump.) Further, FAR is a deliberative process, allowing plenty of time for improvments, and there is no such thing as "Delist it and be done with it". SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:00, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Is anyone willing to work to bring this article back to FA standard? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:39, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

I would like to take shot at it. Best Regards,
  Bfpage |leave a message  15:04, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
I'm willing to help as well. --BrianCUA (talk) 15:27, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Interested editors

There are some excellent sources regarding Eagle scouts that are up-to-date [20], [21], [22].

  Bfpage |leave a message  23:09, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Analyzing references

I've used checklinks to identify reference issues and have made an update.

  Bfpage |leave a message  21:04, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Eagle Scout (Boy Scouts of America). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

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

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:19, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Eagle Scout (Boy Scouts of America). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

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

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:22, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Eagle Scout (Boy Scouts of America). 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:

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

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:56, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Eagle Scout (Boy Scouts of America). 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:

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

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:19, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Eagle Scout (Boy Scouts of America). 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:

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

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:51, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 21 October 2019

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Jerm (talk) 18:10, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Eagle Scout (Boy Scouts of America) → Eagle Scout (Scouts BSA)

  • Comment Previously the "mid-age" program was named "Boy Scouts" and the organization "Boy Scouts of America" Now the "mid age" program is named "Scouts BSA" and the organization remains "Boy Scouts of America". I think that that points towards leaving the title as-is for three reasons:
  • "Boy Scouts of America" (vs. "Boy Scouts")in the current title is the name of the organization, not the program, and that has not changed. So the article has been named by the organization, not the program. And rightly so, because the award is not confined to the program.
  • A 2nd reason is that "Boy Scouts" is still a common name for "Scouts BSA"
  • A third reason is that Eagle is not limited to the "Scouts BSA" program....it applies to other "older scout" programs. So it would wrong to name it by only one of the eligible programs.
So I guess that that's an "oppose" Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 20:45, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
  • FWIW, I think the strongest argument in favour of the move would be consistency with Scouts BSA. The current title is already consistent with Boy Scouts of America, the article on the larger organization. So I guess it comes down to which is the better disambiguator: the name of the program or the name of the organization. I would tend to lean toward the current title on WP:RECOGNIZABILITY grounds, but it's not an easy call, IMO. Colin M (talk) 21:00, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
If I may emphasize a structural point from my reason #3 above, there is no "THE" program, it exists in multiple BSA programs. North8000 (talk) 13:44, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for pointing that out, I did miss that point. I was just going by the article intro, which only describes it as part of the Scouts BSA program. But now I see that the "Requirements" section does talk about it being attainable in other programs. Given that information, I'm definitely inclined to oppose the move. Colin M (talk) 16:55, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
Those are good arguments, but respectfully IMHO not relevant here. IMHO the article rightfully never was and shouldn't be named for any single program. For example, Eagle can be earned in Venturing which is a Boy Scouts of America program, which has nothing to do with Scouts BSA. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 15:33, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose. The name of the overall organization is still the Boy Scouts of America. Eagle Scout can be earned by Scouts BSA members as well as Venturers and Sea Scouts. Therefore, it should still use the differentiator of the bigger organization, not its subdivision. EricSerge (talk) 15:54, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
    • Comment The biggest misconception in the above statement is about who can earn the rank.

4.2.0.1 Scouting Ranks and Advancement Age Requirements
All Scouts BSA awards, merit badges, badges of rank, and Eagle Palms are only for registered Scouts, including Lone Scouts, and also for qualified Venturers or Sea Scouts who are not yet 18 years old. Venturers and Sea Scouts qualify by achieving First Class rank as a Scout or Lone Scout ... [1]

While the award may be earned by Venturers and Sea Scouts, they must first have earned Scout, Tenderfoot, Second Class and First Class as a member of a troop operating under Scouts BSA. --evrik (talk) 18:22, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
True, however they are not required to be a member of a Scouts BSA Troop to earn Star, Life, and Eagle if they are registered members of a Venture Crew or Sea Scout Ship. EricSerge (talk) 19:45, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
Each division has its own awards. It just happens that older scouts can also earn the Eagle while venturers or Sea Scouts. --evrik (talk) 22:06, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
If the pages have already been opened and contain the redirects Q.E.D., the problem is solved. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 18:54, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://www.scouting.org/resources/guide-to-advancement/mechanics-of-advancement/scouts-bsa/
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Eagle_Scout/Archive_2&oldid=1214830466"