Talk:Scouting/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

old comments

The early history is incorrect. The first overseas Scout troop was established in Gibraltar (1st Gibraltar Scout Troop), which has since amalgamated with the 4th troop, becoming the 1st/4th Gibraltar (Marquis of Milford Haven's Own)Scout Troop. Even the Malta Scouts website states that they applied for resistration in November 1908, which was granted a year later. During 1908 however the 1st Gibraltar Scout Troop was already up & running and recognised. I attempted an ammendment, but it reverted to it's original incorrect text.

---

Is it relevant to have a link to the Hitler Youth? --ALargeElk 17:35, 25 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Maybe. If so, also need to link to the Soviet Russian youth org. Young Pioneers, I think? Should make clear that these organizations are not part of Scouting, but are perversions of scouting created by authoriatarian governments. crazyeddie 21:33, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

---

I'm a scout, but I'm not a native English-speaker, so I won't put my English into an encyclopedia.

Anyway, this article needs more information about the current global scouting (the history part is pretty good). WOSM and WAGGGS are linked, but they should definitely be mentioned in an article like this.

More stuff is also needed on what scouts do, and they should even have their own articles (since there are several different teaching methods like learning-by-doing, the patrol system, and even more of other stuff). This is a lot more work though, putting in more about WOSM and WAGGGS and their relation to the national organizations (one or many/country) should be the highest priority.

Otherwise, I checked this article to see if Wikipedia was right about something I already knew about, and this article was light, but I still found it pleasing. -Alexander

---

This article is a little light on as to what scouts actually do. I always thought that the goal was to earn the "World Domination Badge" but then again I may just have watched one too many episodes of The Goodies :-) Seriously, I know they go on hikes, earn badges for being good little boys and girls, and praise God, King, and Country, but what else? --Robert Merkel 05:13, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

[1] This is the official definition.

Baloo rch 18:16, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I was actually looking for something a little more concrete, reflecting the week-to-week activities of a typical scout group. --Robert Merkel 12:25, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Well, the troop I was in had a meeting once a week, went on some sort of camping trip about once a month, and a week long camp (along with other troops in the region) once a year. The meetings opened with a flag ceremony, then we handled whatever business needed to be done (a bit less formally then 4-H, no Robert's Rules of Order, and this was done while still standing at ease, following the flag ceremony), then we broke down into patrols for book learning side of merit badges and the ranks, as well as what practical lessons and tests as could be done indoors. Or the whole troop took part. Then we had some sort of physical activity for about a half hour. (Usually "ditch", which was a form of tag - fun, but didn't really teach much, so the adult leaders didn't like it much. We sure enjoyed it though. I was pretty good at hiding, not so good at actually chasing somebody else down. I hated being it.) Then back inside for about another half hour of serious stuff, and closed with another flag ceremony. Total time, about two hours.

At certain intervals, courts of honor were held (usually in place of the regular weekly meeting) to hand out new ranks and merit badges. When somebody earned Eagle Scout, a special court of honor was held for them. Hope that helps. crazyeddie 21:33, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The troop that I am a leader at meets every friday night for 2 and a half hours. We begin with a flag ceromony, and then we play a steam release game to calm the kids down. After the steam release game, we either work on badges, have a wide game, team building exercises, or an investiture (This depends on what day of the month it is). After this we normally have another game (That is usually educational) we also do STA's (This is a list of things that the patrol must complete by the end of the evening). After we are finished we have another Flag Ceremony, and close off.

At least once a month we have a Court of Honour after the normal Troop meeting. A Court of Honour in South Africa is a meeting of all the Patrol Leaders, Troop Leaders and the Troop Scouter, the Assistant Troop Scouters might join in if they are invited. The Court of Honour decides things like, which Scouts are in which Patrols, who is elligable for PLTU (Patrol Leaders Training Unit), who is elligable to become a Patrol Leader or Second, and they have a say in what happens at Scout meetings in terms of the program. Jediwannabe 06:51, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

levels

the article mentions venture scouts, eagle scouts, explorer scouts etc, but my impresion was that there exsited several "lower" levels as well... cubs and such like. Anybody know sufficent about the scouts to write about them? Iainscott 08:33, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)

• In the U.K., there are Beaver Scouts (six to eight years old), Cub Scouts (eight to ten), Scouts (10-14), Explorer Scouts (14-18) and the Scout Network (18-25). Ajsilver 17:39, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• In the US, you have various ranks of cub scouts - IIRC, rank in the cub scouts was based on age, not achievement. Then you had the Webelos, an intermediate rank. Then you had the scouts themselves - Eagle scout is just the top rank within the Boy Scout hierarchy. There is a hierarchy of ranks within Boy Scouts that is based on achievement, but after you leave scouts, the Eagle Scout rank is pretty much the only one worth mentioning. (It really looks like we need a list of ranks within scouting and cub scouting.)

Venture and explorer scouts are basically scouting groups that are outside the Scout hierarchy. You might think of them as "young adult" scouts - I think the age range on those is something like 16-21, while regular scouting cuts off at 18. There aren't any ranks within Venture or Explorer scouts, but there is generally an overlapping membership with a local regular troop, unless the Venture/Explorer patrol is located in some godforsaken wilderness. crazyeddie 21:33, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Not in the UK. Explorers is up to 18, when you can take out a warrant or join the Scout Network, or both. Network allows you to complete the Scout programme up to the age of 25. Unless you leave the movement, at no time are you outside any 'heirarchy' - Explorers and Network are sections like anyother, except that they are orgainised on a district and county level respectively. It may be different in the US, but this adds to my case for having different pages on different organisations. Ajsilver 18:22, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

SA works completely different. We have Cubs (8-10), Scouts (10-18) and then you can do your Warrant, or join a Rover crew (Or both). Rovers is from 18 to 30. Jediwannabe 08:20, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

• As it stands, the ranks section needs work. This should make a basic distinction between youth members, young adults (e.g. Rovers), adult leadership in the group, and adult leaders in the wider organisation. Youth members were originally broken down into ages 8-10 (Cubs) in Sixes, Scouts (11-17) in Patrols, and Rovers, but there are now younger pre-Cub age divisions in some countries, multiple different age divisions, the Patrol system is not always used, and there are too many national variations to describe them all on this page. Youth membership is voluntary. Adult leaders in the group are generally volunteers trained and uniformed, supported by others such as parents. In a Scout organisation, there is generally a district/area/council/national hierarchy, also mainly volunteers, and a small professional staff. Zaian

All. When we speak of levels in scouting, we are typically speaking of the program levels within scouting, not the ranks within that program. While each Scouting Organization may use different terms, the typical programs are: Cub (8-10), Scouts (10-14), Venturers (14-18), Rovers (18-25+). --Emb021 20:49, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't think that you may find a typical program scheme, but perhaps a "classic" or "traditional" one? In "Renewed Approach to Program" by the European Scout Office this is described with:

As mentioned above, the traditional system comprises three age sections:

• Cub Scouts, from 7/8 to 11/12 years old.
• Scouts, from 11/12 to 16/17 years old.
• Rovers, from 16/17 to 21/22 years old.

They propose also some other schemes with Beavers, Venturers, Junior Scouts, Senior Scouts, ... --jergen 21:14, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Controversy

There have been some major controveries in the recent past involving the scouts. I remember seeing in the news about one atheist scout who was not giving his rank of Eagle scout after completing all of the rigurous requirements because he refused to declare a belief in some form of supernatural being. There was also a banning of gays from scouts (which has some merit even amongst gay supporters because you wouldn't have boys and girls living in tents together (for obvious reasons), so you probably wouldn't want two boys who are oriented towards eachother in the same situation). These incidents have made me look down on the scouts despite being a fervent supporter before, so I think its important that they be included.

These are all US-centric problems. In e.g. Europe there are mixed (boys and girls) associations and also homo sexuals and atheists in scouting. One even sleeps mixed in the same tents, not a big deal. LARS 13:40, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Scouts DO NOT sleep mixed sexes in the same tent or room in the UK. Also, technically Scouts cannot be atheists as they promise to do their duty to their god. Ajsilver 22:44, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

In the Netherlands, I've never heard of any such problem or controversy --DJiTH 20:40, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Boy Scouts of America discusses this topic, though doesn't mention that most other scouting programs allow atheists and gays. Perhaps something should be added here. Nereocystis 23:25, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I don't know that much about scouts anywhere outside of my native Ireland, but I know that here the Catholic Church has a great deal of influence in the movement, and anything "un-Catholic" (even not being very fervent in your belief in the Almighty) is frowned upon. >:( elvenscout742 16:00, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)

In Hong Kong, religion is not an issue. Many people are agnostic. Christian Groups accepts non-Christians to be Leaders . Catholic Groups accepts non-Catholics to be Leaders. Buddhist Groups accepts non-Buddhists to be Leaders. Taoist Groups accepts non-Taoists to be Leaders. Not to mention non-religious Groups. Respecting to others' believes makes things fine. HenryLi 16:48, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

I am a Scout Leader in the UK. All members (a member counts as all ages, including adults) are allowed to be any religion they like, as long as they believe in some form of higher being. I was asked this in my interview. In practice 1) the kids are considered to be too young to have made up their minds, 2) providing you don't actively advocate atheism to your kids, you'll be fine. I have been involved as a formal leader for 9 months now, and there has never been any religious content in any of our activities.

In the US, you kinda have to not be an atheist, but AFAICT, they didn't really enforce it much. The requirement is kind of like the one in the Masonic Lodge. About the closest you can get, officially, is Deist. Any other religion is pretty much open though. (Hmm, a troop sponsered by the Church of Satan?) I became agnostic when I was 16 (immediately after - if not during - earning three religious awards!), and basically just played along. "Don't ask, don't tell", yada yada yada. I see the ban on homosexuals to be against the very values that Scouting stands for, and as an Eagle Scout, it disgusts me. I'm not involved with scouting right now, but I hope by the time I have kids, and they're old enough to go into scouting, either the BSA will have come to their senses, or a major breakaway organization will have started. crazyeddie 21:33, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Pretty much the only time the religious issue becomes an issue in the BSA is when you have a boy who wants to insist they are atheist. There is no list of 'approved' religions, there is no requirement that you even belong to a church, only that you can accept the concept of doing your "duty to God" as YOU see it. Pretty much only the 'militant atheist' types make an issue of it. --Emb021 20:43, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

In Austria, while the "default" promise mentions God, members are encouraged to come up with their own promise, and including God is not required. I know of several atheists in my group, and I have not heard of anyone complaining about that. The official law does include the line "The Scout searches the way to God", but this is generally interpreted as a mandate to explore the spiritual side of things in general (i.e. it does not force people to arrive at a certain answer).

I don't get why so many people say that BSA banning homosexuals is aginst Scouting's values. Look at the Oath. It ends "...physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight." Also, the Scout Law. "...Brave, Clean, and Reverent." "Clean" refers to the Scout not just physically, but morally and spiritually. The values embraced by homosexuals clash directly with some of the core values of Boy Scouts of America. The leaders in my Troop teach us about moral and spiritual stuff, their value system, all the time. I can defanetly see why having a "gay" Scoutmaster would be A Bad Thing. I know I woulden't join a Troop like that. --James 02:43, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

It all depends on how you view homosexuality. For some, its an immoral activity, hence why they shouldn't be involved in scouting. Currently, most of your major religious groups in the Western World have an issue with it (most mainstream Christian denominations, Jewish, I think Muslim, I know the Dalai Lama spoke against it, etc). Because the BSA had heavy ties with religious groups (they charter most of the units), the BSA has such a policy. If, however, you think there is nothing wrong with homosexuality, then you have an issue with the BSA's policy. But these people need to really focus their efforts on the source of this policy: the religious groups that still teach that homosexual behavior is wrong. --Emb021 15:44, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

---

Read on the main page the "Outlander" promise. This was recognition by B-P himself that atheists should not be excluded from Scouting.

Uh, AFAIK, the "Outlander" promise was for those who had an issue with "duty to country" (ie swear allegiance to King/Country, etc.). It had nothing to do with "Duty to God". I've not read/heard anything from B-P regarding his feeling one way or another in particular with atheists. He is usually quoted as saying that 'no boy can become a scout without accepting some kind of duty to God' (paraphrased from memory). --Emb021 20:43, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Finland

I think it's a bit unfair to claim that Finnish Scouting is scewed towards Christianity. "God" is any higher power, be he the Christian God, Allah, Vishnu, or whoever else you may wish. The official line of WOSM is that Scouts should be encouraged to develop a spiritual aspect to their lives, and so asking for a promise to God is encompased in the whole movement (although it is worth noting that some European countries let the Scout decide if they wish to make a promise to God or to their leader, but the spiritual development part will still be encouraged.)

"God" in all European countries refers primarily to Jesus, and "God" with a capital "G" is only used in monotheistic religions. elvenscout742 16:22, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)

While that may be true (it is to a degree in the US), WOSM has specifically stated that all scouts/scouters are to interpret "duty to God" as doing YOUR religious duty, however YOU define it, to whatever YOUR higher power is. it is a mistake made by many in and outside the movement to interprete "duty to God" ONLY in the context of a Judeo-Christian God. --Emb021 20:45, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Promise?

The Scout Promise is:

On my honour, I promise that I will do my best,
to do my duty to God and to the Queen,
to help other people,
and to keep the Scout Law.

The promise given on this page is nothing like this. I won't delete it if it is a valid alternative version, but this needs clarifying. ajsilver 5th March 2005.

Looks like a British vs. American Scouting thing. Looks like it parallells the Amercian Scout's Oath. crazyeddie 21:47, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Rather than have each new person who reads the article add their own country's Scout Oath/Law/Promise, can we please put the tag :For the Scout Oath/Law/Promise of other countries, please see the individual country's Scouting article ? Otherwise, this article will become too crowded. Three examples is a good relative sample. Thanks, Chris 18:37, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

U.K. Scouting

Would it not be a good idea to have a seperate article on Scouting in the U.K., as for British users most of the content on international Scouting is not really what they would be looking for I feel. Ajsilver 22:00, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure that such an article would be very substansive. How about a redir to Scouting#UK? Lan3y - Talk 22:29, Mar 17, 2005 (UTC)

Actually I think that it would be a very useful article. In this general article there is a lot of conflicts between different countries, such as the organisation, sections, promises, uniforms, rules, etc. I just feel that this would resolve a lot of conflict on this page. Also, the Boy Scouts of America appear to have their own article. It should also be remembered that British Scouting has a longer history. Ajsilver 18:15, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Right, I have just split off Scouting around the world, as per suggestions on WP:PR. Feel free to create the UK article. Lan3y - Talk 18:57, Apr 9, 2005 (UTC)

Okay, thank you. I will start on that in the near future. Anyone else is welcome to help. Ajsilver 16:33, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Girl Scouts

I was very surprised to be redirected to a general scouting page that is mostly Boy Scouts in order. I would like to spend some time to put together a Girl Scout/Girl Guides Section, but feel that is should be a distinct topic from this page-- origins are similar of course, but the two organizations are pretty distinct in goals and procedures these days, in the US at least. I am new to wikipedia and would welcome any advice in this endeavor, but I am going to get started! thanks

I would strongly favour keeping boy and girl scouts together. It's still one movement. There are also many mixed associations arround. LARS 08:03, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I also would urge you to create a section within this article. The principles are the same, this isn't the Boy Scouts page; it's entitled Scouting. Lan3y - Talk 22:53, Apr 6, 2005 (UTC)

Girl Scouts

The two organizations are seperate organizations in all manners. They are run as seperate corporations, have different missions, and are no longer affiliated with each other in any way. Girl Scouting has a problem in it's being treated as the same organization in light of the judical issues related to Boy Scouts, that has hurt the organization's ability to fund raise and gain corporate support due to the continual short sighted actions of treating the two as one, as this site does. Please separate the two organizations in this document.

As far as I am aware, the USA is the only country in the world that seperates Boy and Girl Scouting. In South Africa all scout troops are given a choice to be either unisex (Boy or Girl), or to be coed. So Boy and Girl Scouting should be kept together, as they are not seperate organisations (Except in the US) -Jediwannabe 08:16, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, but that is incorrect. While many countries have had their Boy Scout organizations go co-ed, there still exist separate Girl Scout/Girl Guide organizations. In fact, that is true in South Africa also! There is the Girl Guides Association of South Africa. You can check them out at www.girlguides.org.za. There is a separate world Girl Scout/Guide organization, WAGGGS. So Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts are most definetly separate organizations, and the Girl Scout/Guide leaders are very adamat of that fact. --Emb021 20:59, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Polish Scouts

There seems to be an increasing emphasis on the role of Polish Scouts in WWII on this page. The infomation is covered adequately elsewhere and the edits are untidy and infringe copyright having been lifted more or less directly from the linked articles. CustardJack 12:12, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

A few additions

I added a section on "conceptual influences" (for want of a better term) and a line about the Young Pioneers / Hitler Youth in the "offshoots" section. Hope this meets with approval. Dawud 03:26, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

No it doen't - I rewrote most of what was added because it was irrelevant and incorrect - you have obviously not been involved, or if so, didn't understand what Scouting is about. --Mikeh 15:19, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

Gee, Mikeh, sounds like you have a NPOV problem. 198.6.95.95 20:02, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

Discrimination against "Infidels" and Bisexual/Gay people:

See Talk:Girl Scouts of the USA#Discrimination against "Infidels" and Bisexual/Gay people:. --Mistress Selina Kyle 19:27, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

What is your point by posting this link here? Do you have a suggestion for this article? Johntex\^talk 20:41, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Agree, this only shows her own biases.Rlevse 16:30, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Merge with Boy Scouts

Seems to be a good idea to me. Too much redundancy otherwise. LARS 11:49, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree Jediwannabe 08:23, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Disagree. We have an article on the Boy Scouts of America, why not one on the corresponding British organization? There should at least be a stub. --Smack (talk) 19:13, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

There _is_ an article, very good one, on the British Scouts, at The Scout Association as well as many individual national articles within List of World Organization of the Scout Movement members, all of Europe and many more nations are represented there. Chris 20:31, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Sorry. The former article title led me to believe that they called themselves "Boy Scouts". --Smack (talk) 20:12, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

See also and External links sections

Both seriously need to be cleaned up. They are so long and unstructured nobody is ever going to read them. LARS 11:52, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

I'd suggest to add a link to the Scout History Association website: http://www.netpages.free-online.co.uk/sha/ 82.59.32.18 13:32, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

About Sir Francis Vane

Some influential figures are missing in the early history of scouting.

For example, I can't find any reference to Sir Francis Vane: even if Baden Powell founded the scouting movement, the modern style of scouting was born from the struggle between the militaristic side (B-P himself) and the "pacifist side" (Vane), that led to various splits and reunifications in the scout movement itself. The modern view of scoutism as a "pacifist" movement (that prevailed in Europe, at least) is definitely closer to the ideas of Francis Vane than to the ones of Baden Powell.

Various references on http://www.netpages.free-online.co.uk/sha/ (expecially http://www.netpages.free-online.co.uk/sha/military.htm and http://www.netpages.free-online.co.uk/worldscouts/ital.htm) 82.59.32.18 13:32, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

I hyperlinked Francis Vane in the article, but there is no article it links to, yet. But there is an Order of World Scouts article. Chris 00:03, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Actually, it should be noted that some sources said that the British Boy Scouts (Vane's organization) were actually more militaristic. To me, it seems that each side accused the other of militarism... :-( --Lou Crazy 04:14, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Related userbox templates

{{Mergeto|Template:User ScoutGuide|date=October 2006}}

vote to merge the first two boxes, as redundant. Personally, I favor the Scout/Guide one, because not all Scouts are members of WOSM or WAGGGS, and it uses a defunct and generic Scout fleur-de-lis so as to avoid any trouble with copyright, just like they did for the bald eagle rather than the badge for the Eagle Scout userbox. Chris 20:48, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Code	Result
{{user Scout}}	This user is a member of the worldwide family of Scouts.
{{user ScoutGuide}}	This user is a member of one of the 500+ world Scouting/Guiding associations and contributes articles about their history.
{{user ScoutTrade}}	This user is a member of one of the 500+ world Scouting or Guiding associations and collects and trades Scout memorabilia.
{{user Wood Badger}}	Wood Badge Beads - 2 This user is a Wood Badger.

External links filling up

If your website is not international or global in scope, please place it in the appropriate national or Regional Scouting article, it was getting too full here and could potentially have 220+ national websites linked. Thanks, Chris 21:17, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Role of Scouting at the United Nations

Jergen had a problem with this text.

• The WOSM is the non-governmental organization (NGO), that represents the Scouting movement at the United Nations.

Discussion of the WOSM role at the United Nations is relevant and appropriate on this page. evrik 16:25, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

See notes left on the fact request. The ref you left makes no mention of the WOSM or Scouting. If you find such a ref saying WOSM represents Scouting at the UN, I'll agree with you, Evrik. Otherwise, I'll have to agree with Jergen. If you are interested in Scouting articles, you are welcome to join the project. Rlevse 16:28, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Scout Shop

This page has a header suggesting that the article be merged into this Scouting page with discussion directed here. What do people think? I'm inclined to agree. I have put the header on the Scouting page too. --Bduke 10:30, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Agree Both those should be merged. See answer to your Traditional Scouting question on my talk page too. Rlevse 11:06, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Agree' Yes, merge them both. --Naha|^(talk) 14:28, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Agree Merge them both Jediwannabe 10:59, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Board of Review article

Is this term actually used anywhere outside of the BSA? --Bduke 06:29, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

I think Board of Review (Boy Scouts of America) should be merged with Board of Review (Scouting). Ideally with the information, if this exists outside BSA at all. But again, this is different term from Scouting in general, and therefore should not be hidden in Scouting. If we describe each and every detail, scouting term etc. directly in the main article Scouting, it will get unreadable long. LARS 14:40, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

I also would like to know if organizations other than the BSA user BORs, or something like them. We may be chasing a ghost here. Rlevse 14:50, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Merge if there's no significant usage outside BSA. Rlevse 00:46, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

I've merged. I don't recognise this term outside the BSA and anyway I don't think it's important enough for its own article unless someone has a lot of interesting things to say. Zaian 23:51, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Scout Jamboree merge

• Agree, but leave the World Scould Jamboree article alone. This general information and links is best in the broader article. --Bduke 08:20, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

agree with Bduke, just trying to get some of the stubs down or combined. man there are a lot of them. Chris 08:46, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Agree, but move all mentions of national Jamborees to the respective association's articles. --jergen 10:43, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

• Disagree. If somebody wants to look up, what the term "Jamboree" means in scouting, he will find Jamboree and via this Scout Jamboree. There should be an own article decribing this. One does not want to look through the big main Scouting article for "Jamboree". LARS

PS. If your are so keen on merging, one could think about merging the different scout jamboree articles with each other to one article Jamboree (Scouting), but definitely not with or into Scouting. LARS 14:52, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

The individual articles are generally well developed, it is the stub that is out of place and would find a good home within the Scouting article. Chris 19:04, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Scout Jamboree could be redirected to the Scouting page, so if someone goes to Jamboree, they get there and find it in the contents. I still agree with Chris. --Bduke 21:32, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

DAB and REDIRECT make Scout Jamboree a dab page with redirects to Scouting and World Scout Jamboree. Rlevse 00:47, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

"Jamboree" by itself already has a disambig page. I still vote merge. Chris 18:35, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Disagree - Jamboree shouldn't direct straight to Scouting, nor should it redirect to World Scout Jamboree. The Scout Jamboree page is useful because it allows a collection of links to different types of Scout Jamborees, e.g. national Jamborees, and I don't think those should go on the Jamboree page. Zaian 11:53, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Disagree - I like Lars' idea of having a Jamboree (Scouting) page, where all of the various Scout Jamborees have their own section. I believe this is the best action to take. Jamborees definitely should NOT redirect to Scouting. This article will become too large if we continue to merge areas that are large enough in their own right to warrant their own articles. --Naha|^(talk) 17:31, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

No agreement and the discussion has gone quiet. I've removed the 'merge' tag. Zaian 18:57, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Merge with Section (Scouting)

• Again disagree. What a section is in scouting is important enough to have an own article, if somebody wants to look it up, but we don't this text merged into Scouting, for it is not inportant enough to describe Scouting in general. Simply keep the article. LARS 14:45, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Merge the concept is important in Scouting, the term itself is too generic and professional-based for people to seek out by itself. I have now worked with several associations, and never heard reference to the term outside the national Scout headquarters. Too general. Chris 00:37, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Merge Sections by age are common to ALL scout groups. Some countries also use the term to refer to regions divisions of their Scouting associations. This could be a Dab and Redirect, like the Jamboree topic. Rlevse 00:49, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Merge as it's not very interesting on its own. This should be included as part of a rewrite of the section called Hierarchy. Zaian 23:55, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Seems to have gone quiet. I wish someone would do the merge or else remove those ugly 'merge' boxes at the top of the article! Zaian 11:53, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Keep and Expand - I think there is a lot more info out there to where the article could be expanded large enough to need its own article. --Naha|^(talk) 17:34, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

No agreement and the discussion has gone quiet. I've removed the 'merge' tag. Zaian 18:57, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

"There is no Scouting in totalitarian countries"

Kintetsubuffalo: I think what you're trying to say is that there is generally no Scouting in Communist Bloc countries. This is true. During the Cold War, Scouting was generally kept out of Communist Bloc countries, which viewed it as an organization of enemy countries. But there were many allies of the United States (or non-aligned countries) that were (or are) also totalitarian, and a quick look at the WOSM member page shows that a lot of them did have scouting throughout the period. -- ran (talk) 23:33, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

ran: Not at all, I am most familiar with what I said and say, and will keep reverting. The governments you speak of were repressive, certainly, but not totalitarian. That difference is what allows some to retain their Scouting, while others not. That is also why Myanmar, which is not Communist, is part of the 'not' list. Chris 23:43, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

What's the difference between your use of "repressive" and "totalitarian"? For example, South Korea was incredibly paranoid about anti-communist ideology, and was able to perpetrate atrocities like the Gwangju Massacre on its own citizens. It also had Scouting throughout the period. Or what about the Republic of China on Taiwan? Fixated upon the reconquest of the Mainland for decades, under martial law all the way up to 1987, yet the Scouts of China existed throughout this period.

Another country: Libya. Politics of Libya: "Libya's political system is theoretically based on the political philosophy in Moammar Al Qadhafi's Green Book, which combines socialist and Islamic theories and rejects parliamentary democracy and political parties. In reality, Qadhafi exercises near total control over the government." -- ran (talk) 23:48, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

It's a matter of degrees. Rather than belabor this further, I will direct you to Totalitarianism and Political repression, the terms and meanings are different, though I agree they are the same end of the spectrum. One example in modern day which proves the rule is Belarus, which is Communist, and most certainly repressive, but not totalitarian, and their Scouts are recognized. Chris 23:56, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

I've already read those articles to prepare for this discussion, which is exactly the reason why I chose to specifically point out the ideological aspect of South Korean, ROC, and Libyan dictatorships. Those were/are not just "repressive" -- South Korea and the Republic of China were totalitarianism regimes devoted to ideologically inculcating their citizens, before democratization in the 80's. -- ran (talk) 00:01, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Here's a read that you might be interested in: [2]

Basically, the idea is that there are many "grey areas" between "totalitarianism" and "authoritarianism", that makes the boundary between them difficult to define. There are/were many regimes -- such as the Soviet Union after Stalin, China after Mao, Castro's Cuba, Tito's Yugoslavia, Taiwan under Chiang Kai-Shek, Indonesia under Suharto etc -- that did/do attempt to mobilize the population ideologically, but not to the level of Hitler, Stalin, or Mao. Are they "totalitarian" or "authoritarian"? This question is not easy to answer.

What you've done, Kintetsubuffalo, is to sidestep that question. Instead, you define this fine line between "totalitarianism" and "authoritarianism" so that it sits exactly where you want it to sit -- i.e. between Scouting and no-Scouting countries. This way, you can automatically label all of the non-Scouting countries "totalitarian", while any country with Scouting automatically isn't "totalitarian", even if it's Libya, or South Korea / Taiwan in 1980. That's pretty sketchy. -- ran (talk) 00:35, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

I am at work and will get to it when I get to it. You need not bait me on my talk page. And you are attributing motives to me that are not my own, coming dangerously close to being rude. See the first paragraph at Wikipedia:Civility And keep the discussion here, not on my talkpage. Chris 02:12, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

I haven't said nor done anything confrontational against you, Chris. You need to calm down. -- ran (talk) 02:19, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

In fact you have, baiting me on my own talk page and claiming motives for what I am doing. You don't know me, you've not participated in WikiProject Scouting to know what we're working at, and you have been frequently reverting back to your own POV what was a concisely and intentionally worded NPOV paragraph. You need to back off. Chris 02:28, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Scouting does not own this page, nor does your POV represent WikiProject Scouting. Your "concisely and intentionally worded NPOV paragraph" is factually incorrect. And as a Wikipedian, I don't have any reason to back off from a paragraph that is factually incorrect.

I'm in WikiProject Chinese Provinces, and I have written up huge chunks of various Chinese provinces articles, but I have never rejected anyone simply because "I don't know them" or "they're not part of the project" or "they're new", nor have I ever thought of our WikiProject as a clique in which you must "participate in" to know what's going on. I don't own any of the articles I write, and I don't take for granted that everything I write is automatically NPOV. Often new people arrive with new information, and I may not agree with their POV -- but we've always been able to work something out in the end.

In short, Chris, you need to relax. I'm not here to attack you, or ruin this article. I'm here to discuss the intriguing question of why Myanmar today is totalitarian while Libya today isn't (at least according to this article). So can we talk? -- ran (talk) 02:39, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Chris and Ran: everyone just take a deep breath and come back to this tomorrow. Please keep the discussion on this talk page and not in the editing summaries; and please work changes out here before further editing. None of us want an edit war. My main concern is factual accuracy. My suggestion is to keep words like "totalitarian" and "repressive" out of article and merely say something like "During the ... era...country xyz did not have Scouting." Rlevse 02:54, 3 February 2006 (UTC), Scouting WikiProject Coordinator

I second Rlevse - everybody chill. Saying countries X,Y,Z,α, and β currently do not have scouting, and that G,L,and T had it but no longer do will be sufficient. If you can find a citation for any given WOSM policy and reasoning, fine, but until then Ran does have a minor point. -- Thesquire (talk - contribs) 03:08, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

I second Thesquire.

If we look at the history of Scouting, mainly countries with totalitarian or repressive regimes had no Scouting movement at all or were excluded by both WOSM and WAGGGS:

• The explanation for the first is simple: Totalitarian/repressive regimes banned Scouting because the organizationes tried to maintain the independence of the movement.
• In the second case, member organizations were normally excluded not for being situated in a totalitarian/repressive country, but for loosing their political independece (see WOSM-constitution Art. 1.1 & 5.3 [3]).

If we follow this, even a Chinese mainland Scouting organization may become a member of WOSM, if it's non-political and independent from the government (even if this doesn't sound very likely). --jergen 12:56, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Very important in this respect is also WOSM's and WAGGGS's requirement, that the individual's membership in national associations must be voluntary. This would rule out state youth organisations, as e.g. the pioneering organisations in the Warsaw Pact and also the Polish scouts in the communist years there, since then young had to be member either in scouting or pioneering. LARS 14:44, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks to everyone for mediating. With regards to the presence of Scouting in some authoritarian countries but not others: Could it be because of the religious element as well? That could be why Scouting is fine in Libya, but not mainland China. -- ran (talk) 14:00, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Most definitely that is a factor in some periods of some countries history. My suggestion is to leave the title of the subsection alone and only edit the text. The title will tell people the general focus of the section and a careful wording of the text will let them figure it out there own way. Rlevse 14:20, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

I can understand both sides and think here is an interesting point touched. AFAIK scouting was always banned in strict, very repressive dictatorships, like communist countries (with arguably the notable exception of Poland, where there was non-WOSM recognized, a bit too state close scouting) or fashist etc. On the other hand many countries, which have scouting presently (e.g. in Africa or the Arab world) or had scouting (e.g. South America), are respectively were definitely no democrazies. I think we should try to present both these sides, without trying to evaluate the degree of repressiveness of the different regimes, since this might be a too momentouos task for the scouting editors. LARS 14:57, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree with LARS' last comment--we shouldn't venture too far into the political arena, which is why the Scouting WikiProject uses the Scout method as its criteria. Let's see if we can all live with the edit I just made. Note one of the links I made is to the Scout method article. Rlevse 15:15, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

I spoke last night to friends in those countries and folks in the know. It seems the situation (as regards WOSM) is very complex with a lot of grey area, often very politically motivated and subjective, from two corners. I don't know where to begin to restructure this paragraph. Chris 20:46, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

I was completely tied up yesterday and off WP so with that and the time difference, I was unable to comment. I want to just make three comments:-

1. I agree with the changes Rlevse has made.
2. With regard to the WOSM's and WAGGGS's requirement that the individual's membership in national associations must be voluntary, there can be a difference between what WOSM and WAGGS says and what goes on in a particular country. I understand that in Indonesia Scouting is tied to Schools and is pretty well not voluntary. Have a look at their numbers. They are massive.
3. Maybe there should be a comment that Scouting is not banned in Andorra. I think it is the only country that does not have Scouting where it is not banned. They are just very small and have basically not got around to having it.--Bduke 22:40, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

The National Scout Organization of Thailand is tied into the school system too. Andorra used to have Scouting, but it seems to have died off due to lack of leaders. Rlevse 22:45, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for Andorra issue being addressed so quickly. I fixed your Thailand link above and my last sig. --Bduke 23:16, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

1. I also agree with the changes Rlevse has made.
2. I think it would be valuable to mention the religious and political aspects of dictatorships supporting, tolerating, or banning Scouting, provided that claims are backed up.
3. I've been looking around on the Internet and found out two things about Scouting in China.
   • There is a "Boy Scouts Club" in Hainan province. Official Site. Information is scarce... they might be government-run, or corporate-run (for profit!), or neither... Needless to say they aren't part of WOSM, but they do seem to take a lot of ideas from Scouting in terms of uniforms, badges, outdoor activities, etc.
   • Voice of America reports that the government has shut down an attempt to start a Scouting organization in Wuhan, central China. The report is a bit dated: [4]. I'm translating loosely here: the organization was shut down because it had failed to register with the government (which it was required to do); the government thought that the organization was political in nature; the organization was also reportedly seeking help from lawyers. No idea what happened since (presumably the government has not changed its stance). The official site is still up: [5], and appears to be regularly maintained (latest news item is dated January 10, 2006), there's a BBS on site as well that's passably active (47 posts yesterday), but there's no organization to go with it, and in fact much of the content of that website is copied from the Scouts of Hong Kong.

-- ran (talk) 03:26, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Can we continue the sub-discussion on actual Scouting in China in Talk:Scouting in Mainland China? Your informations are very interesting and should go in this article. I will copy your contribution to this talk page.

I propose to focus here on the overall article. --jergen 10:38, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Vatican City, too, is too small to have a scout association :-) even though John Paul II was awarded an honorary woodbadge on August 9, 1986 (I was there!). I think I'd classify Belarus as a totalitarian state. Its scout association is no longer a WOSM member. The guides are still in WAGGGGS, though. --Lou Crazy 02:57, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Religious Organization category

What do you think of Scouting being placed in the "religious organizations" cathegory? Of course, the founder was very clear on Scouting as a way to discover your own spiritual life, with whatever religion you'd choose. Of course, many Scout associations are confessional in nature. Still, I wouldn't say that of the scout movement as a whole. What do you think? --Lou Crazy 03:26, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

I've been debating this myself. I'm closing to taking it out of that cat. A non-project person put it in that cat. Rlevse 10:39, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

I suspect that this is part of the USA-specific argument that BSA is a religious organisation and hence does not qualify for state funding. I'm removing the category. If someone wants to put it back, let's have a discussion about it first. Zaian

It's not just the US. See Scout Promise. "To do my duty to God" (WOSM), "To do my duty to my God"(Australia), "To serve God" (Austria), "To do all that I can to do my duty to God" (Chile), "I promise to do my best to serve God" (Norway) and so on. It's only in the Netherlands and the Czech Republic that God seems optional. All others use the reference. Sounds clearly religious to me. // Liftarn

Liftarn, just to clarify, can I ask whether your interest in putting the Scouting page into the religious organizations category is related to the Boy Scouts of America? (If it's not, please excuse my question. We've been side-tracked into political discussions about BSA on this international page before, and this issue is of particular relevance to BSA at the moment because of a court case.) Zaian 10:43, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Just for the record, I have no interest in the BSA (I guess you're refering to Boy Scouts of America). I'm not even on the right continent. And just is anyone is interested I has been active in both KFUK-KFUMs Scoutförbund (The Swedish YMCA-YWCA Guide and Scout Association) and Svenska Scoutförbundet (The Swedish Guide and Scout Association). I was member for a few years, then I got bored and got other interests. // Liftarn

Thanks, I'm also from another continent. Zaian 00:18, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Scouting only asks for a belief in a higher power, it does not require the actual practice of nor belief in a religion. Therefore, it is not a religious organization. Also an in so far as religion goes, members of any religion can join.Rlevse 10:58, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Hang fire folks. We all know that discussions of religion can be difficult. That's why I'm trying to guage whether there's a BSA discussion-behind-the-discussion, before this gets carried away. Zaian 11:27, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Scouting asks for a belief in God, not "a god" or "a deity" or simmilar. That is quite specific so it certainly does not allow members of any religion to join. // Liftarn

It interprets "God" as a higher power. In this way people who belong to religions who do not believe in a "God" (necessarily), such as Buddhists in Thailand, can join and do so of course in that country in large numbers. On another point above, there may be a BSA discussion-behind-the-discussion, but it should not matter. We should have an international perspective and that to me suggests that we should not use the religious organization category. --Bduke 21:31, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Liftarn, not only can Buddhists join, but also Jews, Muslims, Hindus, etc. This is true in BSA, whether you choose to believe it or not. In my own troop here, part of BSA, we have Catholics, Protestants, Buddhhist, and a Jew. Rlevse 22:10, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes, most Scout Associations are open to a wide range of religious beliefs. Scouting has three founding principles: duty to God (or to a higher power), duty to others, and duty to self. In practice, duty to God is often not a big part of the programme, which focuses on teamwork, leadership, social skills, outdoor activities, and so on. This discussion then boils down to what you mean by a "religious organisation". I would interpret that as meaning a "primarily religious organisation" which Scouting is not, whereas if you mean "an organisation including religious principles as part of its programme" then Scouting is that. Many Scout groups also teach cooking. Is Scouting a "cooking organisation"? Zaian 00:18, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

The Scout Promise is in most countries designe to explicitly exclude atheists, agnostics, polytheists et.c. It obviously states monotheism is the only acceptable choise and by using the capitalised form ("God" and not "god") it marks that is's the abrahamic god they are refering to. I'm saying that shouting is based on monotheistic religious principles so it's a religious organisation. // Liftarn

Wow, I didn't know the Buddhists, Shintos, followers of Native American religions, etc worshipped the abrahamic god. I guess I'll have to tell Native Americans I know who follow their tribe's traditional beliefs that they are not nature worshipers, but worshipers of an abrahamic god. And oh yes, I know several Buddhists who'd love to know this. I guess I'll have to tell the Thai and Japanese Scouts they follow abrahamic beliefs too. And yes, members of all these religions are in Scouting and more than welcome to stay. Rlevse 11:43, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Liftarn, I do not know your background, but what you say is not what Scouting has tried to do. Ever since B.P. found that non-Christians were taking up his great game, Scouting has tried to fit what it says to the maximum number of boys (or girls) who can be involved, while keeping to some kind of view about a "higher power". You say it excludes polytheists, yet is it is very popular in India, where Hinduism is polytheist and B.P. supported this. It is also popular in Buddhist countries such as Thailand, yet what most people think is the earliest form of Buddhism is not theist. It can be seen to be atheist or at least agnostic since it does not demand that you believe in a God or Gods, yet you can if you want. Wherever you come down on this, you can still be a Scout. A very recent World Jamboree was in Thailand. So, it is very clear that Scouting is not based on a monotheistic religious principle. It really does allow all religions. The real question is, that if it does this when the the range of all religions is so wide, why it does not allow no religion. I am not convinced by the arguments that WOSM and other Scouting organisations give, but it certainly does not exclude non-monotheists. It only excludes those who have no sense of what a higher power is. --Bduke 12:02, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

I think that while there is a religious side of the scout movement (which can be more or less visible in different countries and associations) it is just a part of the scout program. For this reason I don't think the cathegory is appropriate. Of course, the page for that cathegory has no explainations on what items should belong to the cathegory. If it said "anything even remotely connected to religion", for example, it would be OK to list scouting in it. In that case, even the US Federal Reserve ought to be listed, because it prints billions of pieces of paper with "in God we trust" written on it. ;-) --Lou Crazy 04:07, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Coed or coeducational

"Coeducational" has just been changed to "coed". "coed" is very American, but I can not say I like either term. Back when I was involved in the UK in trying to bring young men and young women together in Scouting activities we called it "mixed activities", but this is not much better. I think I probably prefer "coeducational" because "coed" is an abbreviation for that, but the abbreviation is not much used outside the USA. What do others think? --Bduke 09:39, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Coeducational is better, coed is short for that. Rlevse 10:52, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Troop Positions

In most troops there are more than just those four positions for boys, in the BSA there are six patrol positions and atleast eight troop positions. There are also four different adult positions, Scoutmaster, Assistant Scoutmaster, Troop Committee Chair, and Troop Comittee Member. 168.254.226.175 15:20, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Hierarchy cleanup

I've tagged the Hierarchy section for a cleanup. See Troop Positions and levels on this page for previous discussion about this. Zaian 21:50, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

User:155.198.94.155 has changed this section extensively; I've left the {{cleanup-section}} tag until the section has been reviewed on this discussion page. I'm not meaning to reflect negatively on the new contributions by this. However I have some reservations about the new content as I think it is too UK-centric for a worldwide page. I'm hoping others will join the discussion on this topic. Zaian 12:45, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Let's just get down and do it, making it more international. I'll look at it later today. Let's do the merge from the section below also. Nobody has said it should not happen. --Bduke 20:37, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Merge of Section (Scouting)

It is suggested that Section (Scouting) be merged to here. It is an international article although with the flavour of UK Scouting. The UK article Scouting sections has been merged into the Scout Association article. The merge needs to emphasis the general international nature of this article, but it seems a good idea. Anybody object? --Bduke 05:38, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Having a quick look at the two articles, and the information in Section(Scouting) should be under the Hierarcy section in the main article - also, the information in Hierarchy seems to be too specific to UK Scouting... Horus Kol 09:13, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

I have completed this task. The Hierarcy section is now Sections in Scouting. Section (Scouting) has been merged and redirected here. The whole is now more international but it probably needs a few other editors to look at it in detail. --Bduke 08:57, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Oldest Scout Group

I think we need a separate article on Oldest Scout Groups. It's often a heated debate that shouldn't take place on the main Scouting page. With the centenary of Scouting coming up, this topic is going to pick up popularity. Zaian 20:00, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

I've created a new page for Oldest Scout Groups and moved two recent claimants to this title (1st Glasgow and India's oldest group) to that page. Zaian 16:00, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Images and logo

• Surely there's a better picture illustrating Scouting than two non-Scouts at the memorial on Brownsea Island? A good photo for this article would probably be one with boys and girls of different nationalities, in Scout uniform, e.g. taken at a World Jamboree.
• Should the World Membership Badge be moved to appear at the top of the page? It is a well-known symbol representing the vast majority of Scouts, apart from the breakaway groups, but this could be clarified in the text. If this is felt to exclude the Girl Guides and Girl Scouts, both WOSM and WAGGGS logos could be displayed.

-- Zaian 22:04, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I changed the images and added some information on the WAGGGS trefoil. --jergen 08:00, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Bravo to both of youth, I never liked the stone photo with the two kids either.Rlevse 12:23, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

The new pic is a big improvement, and exactly what I suggested :) However the quality is not great, it's not very recent, and it would be better to show Scouts rather than young adults. So let's keep a look out for (even) better candidate images. PS isn't it time to archive some of this talk page? Zaian 13:20, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Actually, it's time to archive a lot of talk pages. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 13:37, 30 March 2006 (UTC) done

What you call young adults is an important part of Scouing in many countries. The World Scout Moot is open to all WOSM members between 18 and 28. --jergen 15:32, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

I know, I attended the Moot in 1996 when this photo was taken. Sadly I'm not in the photo :) I still say that a photo of younger members would be more representative. Zaian 15:41, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Totalitarian and political youth organizations

Why is this section in the article, maybe it should become its own stub, i have spent a fair amount of time disassociation Boyscouts with the hitler youth and this section just seems to reaffirm an inferoneous connection thank you Ishmaelblues

If you read this section closely, it explains what movements are and are not considered part of the Scouting movement and how certain governments treated Scouting. Rlevse 13:47, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Not considered PART OF SCOUTING? so why include it in an article labeled scouting!

So that people who are confused will understand why it's not considered Scouting. Think about it. Please sign your postings. Rlevse 22:35, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I am a former scoutmaster and still work with the San Gabriel Valley Council. I am not put off by this section on Totalitarian groups and I find the section pointed enough to indicate that these youth movements which are banded together in uniforms are not considered part of the scouting movement, yet this part lets the general readership get an understanding of these non-scout groups. If I was unsuspecting, I could possibly bundle the Hitlerian organizations with scouting. This sets the record straight without pushing the subject too far into its own discussion. Additionally: I happened on this article because I just finished the article on Mount Baden-Powell. I was taken back by the section which discussed the sexual references to Baden-Powell, but again the section did a fine job of rounding out the issue since it seems to have been one once. I did once have a problem with an assistant scoutmaster who turned out to be a pedafile. It's an issue! Magi Media 14:12, 9 April 2006 (UTC)Magi Media

Well said. Rlevse 19:58, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

There seems to beenough info on these other youth organizations that we could take it out of scouting and make it into it's own article, and really eaxpand on it, because it really is a huge field. - Ishmaelblues

This section is a mere 3 short paragraphs, quite a bit would have to be added for a full article. If you are knowledgeable enough, I suggest creating a separate article, but not move this section until we get a chance to see it. Rlevse 19:58, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

The article should at least mention paramilitarism and that Scouting began with, and still carries over many rituals and mindedness, of paramilitarism. I'm sure many scouts see the connection with paramilitary organizations as both a loaded term and negative publicity, but I would also wager that scouting has enough integrity to accept and acknowledge its heritage if only to have the awareness required not to stray into full-fledged militarism. 71.162.255.58 23:16, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

The miltary roots are clearly discussed under origins.Rlevse 23:31, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Maybe under Uniforms and distinctive insignia, a little paragraph about the military and non-milittary roots of the uniform and the insignia. --Egel _Reaction? 08:35, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Scouting in Ireland

This section on Scouting in Ireland added today by User:Jorgenpfhartogs should not be on the main Scouting page - national details should be on a national page. I've asked the author to move it to a national page. Zaian 15:25, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Ditto, I cut it and suggested an article under Category:Scouting in Ireland. Rlevse 16:36, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Packs and Sixs

According to Interamerican Region (OSI) Method and Programming Manual, Six are not mandatory within Cub packs. It could be permanent or formed according the circumstances and specifics needs. According my experience as cub scout leader (and cub scout too) at list in Chilean cub packs it is more important the sense of identification with the pack (the cub scout is member of the pack instead of any six) in contrast of the identification with patrol for the scout section (the scout is member of a patrol within a troop). Opinions? How does the things work in the US, Europe, Asia, Africa? baloo_rch 02:26, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Freemasonry

Whoa, just read this article thoroughly; the editors really need to do their homework to have entirely overlooked Freemasonry. The entire concept of the scouts is based (loosely in some regards) on the tenets and many rituals (massively metaphorically changed and dumbed down) on Freemasonry. I'm disturbed to see such an integral part of the Scouts overlooked! Jachin 16:30, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Any reliable sources on this? --jergen 17:32, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Merger of sections on Early History, Conceptual Influences, and Relationship to Military Scouting

It is suggested that these 3 sections be merged. There is a good deal of similarity between these areas and tightening would help. Below I have a first stab at it. Anybody object or have other ideas? --User:Ctatkinson 05:38, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Many elements of traditional Scouting have their origins in Baden-Powell's own personal education and military training, and in particular his military experiences in late- 19th century Southern Africa fighting along side the Chief of Scouts, Major Frederick Russell Burnham, DSO. Military scouts such as Burnham were trained in ground and cover, movement from cover to cover, map reading, rifle marksmanship, observation, and accurately reporting the results of their observations (Burnham, an American, learned scouting as an Indian tracker in the American Old West). These scouts would act alone or in small groups to perform reconnaissance beyond lines to determine the location and operational conduct of the enemy. A scout had to be a good shot - a good practical shot, and an excellent hunter. Scouts would also act as assassins when the occasion demanded, but this was not the primary definition. In one notable example of this, Burnham undertook the assassination of the Matabele enemy leader Mlimbo, which turned out to be a remarkable success for the British campaign in Rhodesia. Thus, the military scouts fighting in Southern Africa were frontiersmen, but only coincidently.

Baden-Powell learned much about military scouting from his close friend Burnham. But even before going to Africa, Baden-Powell was a brilliant outdoorsman, a distinguished cavalry officer, and reportedly the finest pig sticker in India (To kill a sprinting wild boar with one lance thrust from the back of a galloping horse is a notable achievement for any scout and for quite a while Baden-Powell had the high score of consecutive one-thrust pig kills throughout the British Empire). Baden-Powell's original military training book, Aids To Scouting, was written because he saw the need for improved training of British military enlisted scouts, particularly in the areas of initiative, self-reliance and observation skills. This book envisioned scouts first and foremost as warriors whose business it was to face their enemies with both valor and good cheer and as social workers only afterward. The book's popularity with young boys surprised him. So when he adapted the book for youth in Scouting For Boys, it was natural the movement took up the names Scouting and Boy Scouts.

Scouting began to spread throughout Great Britain and Ireland soon after the publication of Scouting For Boys. The Boy Scout movement swiftly established itself throughout the British Empire. The first recognized overseas unit was chartered in Gibraltar in 1908, followed quickly by Malta. Canada became the first overseas Dominion with a sanctioned Boy Scout program, followed by Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. Chile was the first country outside of the British Dominions to have a recognized scouting program. The first Scout rally was held at the Crystal Palace, London, in 1910. It attracted 10,000 boys, as well as a number of girls, who turned out for this exhibition of scouting. By 1910 India, Singapore, Sweden, Denmark, France, Russia, Finland, Germany, Norway, Mexico, Argentina, Greece and the United States had Boy Scouts. The members of a small number of Scout groups have the right to wear a green scarf/neckerchief in recognition of their membership of those groups founded in 1908.

Local influences have also been a strong part of the Movement. By adopting and modifying local ideologies the Scouting Movement has been able to find acceptance in a wide variety of societies. In America, for example, Scouting uses images drawn from the U.S. frontier experience. This includes not only its selection of animal badges for Cub Scouts, but the underlying assumption that American Indians are more closely connected with nature and therefore have special wilderness survival skills which can be used as part of the training program. British Scouting, by contrast, makes use of imagery drawn from the Indian subcontinent, because that region was a significant focus in the early years of the Scouting Movement. Baden-Powell's personal experiences in India led him to adopt Rudyard Kipling's The Jungle Book as a major influence for the Cub Scouts — for example, the name used for the Cub Scout leader, Akela (whose name was also appropriated for the Webelos), is that of the leader of the wolf pack in the book.

The Boy Scouts were and remain an ingenious organization but they have unquestionably departed in concept from what they were set out to be. But it has to be remembered that the ideas that Baden-Powell promoted were revolutionary in education in his time so it is natural they would evolve. He was unique, a retired army general at 55 years of age, able to inspire and enthuse thousands of young people, from all parts of society, to get involved in activities most of them had never contemplated. The only comparable organization (in the English-speaking world), the Boys' Brigade, has never been able to match the development of the international Scouting movement.

I would support a rewrite, but I think there is too much about Burnham in the version above, and rather too much opinion in the section on military Scouting (which is a recent addition by a single author). Terms like "unquestionably" and "only coincidentally" don't seem right. Zaian 13:04, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Poor prose

"Boy Scouts were and remain an ingenious organization?" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.43.192.134 (talk • contribs)

scouting wiki's

hey, does anybody know if there is a scouting wiki out there?

• http://www.scoutingthenet.com/wiki/index.php/Main/HomePage is the only one I find through Google. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 02:29, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

There are some in german - the largest is http://www.scout-o-wiki.de --jergen 07:18, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

if i set one up for the BSA that would include stuff on each council, lodge, area, rank, merit badge, etc. would anyone like to contribute? Bud0011 02:10, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

• http://www.scoutpedia.nl (dutch)
• http://www.scoutaid.de (german)
• http://www.pfadiwiki.ch (german)
• http://www.gondi-online.de (german)
• http://scout-o-wiki.de (german)
• http://www.schlauesbuch.de (german)
• http://www.scoutpedia.com (german) dead?
• http://wiki.partio.net (fins)

--Egel _Reaction? 12:36, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

i have started one at here. it will be diffrent from the scouting portal, as it will be scouting-specific instead of general purpose. Please see if you can contribute, and if so, contribute what ever you can! Possible topics?

• How to keep older boys interested?
• How to keep contacts with packs and Lodges?
• Common Board of Review questions and explainations
• Possible ways to demonstrate the scout oath, law, motto and slogan
• Resources to merit badges (including meritbadge.com)
• Explain the purpose of a venture crew, the Order of the Arrow, varsity team, etc.
• Information on a council or district
• Proper commitee and patrol leader council functions
• Explainations of the positions
• Dutch oven recipes
• Etc. Bud0011 05:07, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Alright, maybe that wiki won't do what i needed. Here is the new one, that even allows uploading the images! Bud0011 18:49, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Relationship to Military Scouting

I can't figure out what this is about. Per the title (which should be "Relationship to military scouting") it purports to relate the Scouting movement to military scouting. Instead, it reads like a thumbnail of military scouts in Africa. I believe this really has no relationship to Scouting except as part of BPs background. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 21:19, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

I retitled it and did some minor work to it. Rlevse 22:00, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

The title isn't the main issue. Regarding "they have departed in concept from what they were set out to be": I see nothing in this section that was supposed to ever be a part of Scouting. BP specifically removed military drill and training from the Scouting program. Scouts were never trained in boar-sticking or assasination. The military origins are well covered in the Origins section. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 23:13, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Then perhaps we should remove it or merge it into the origins section. Rlevse 01:27, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I see you removed it. That's in line with my thoughts, just wanted to put the case out. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 02:51, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

That's good, now there's a record of why. Rlevse 10:04, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

AndyZ peer reviewer output

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and may or may not be accurate for the article in question.

• Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at WP:LEAD. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.
• Per WP:CONTEXT and WP:MOSDATE, months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.
• Per WP:MOS, avoid using words/phrases that indicate time periods relative to the current day. For example, recently might be terms that should be replaced with specific dates/times.
• There may be an applicable infobox for this article. For example, see Template:Infobox Biography, Template:Infobox School, or Template:Infobox City. (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
• Per WP:MOSNUM, there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 18mm, use 18 mm, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 18 mm.
• Per WP:CONTEXT and WP:BTW, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006, but do not link January 2006.
• Per WP:MOS#Headings, headings generally should not repeat the title of the article. For example, if the article was Ferdinand Magellan, instead of using the heading ==Magellan's journey==, use ==Journey==.
• Please alphabetize the interlanguage links.
• Per WP:WIAFA, this article's table of contents (ToC) maybe too long- consider shrinking it down by merging short sections or using a proper system of daughter pages as per WP:SS.
• Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
  • While additive terms like “also”, “in addition”, “additionally”, “moreover”, and “furthermore” may sometimes be useful, overusing them when they aren't necessary can instead detract from the brilliancy of the article. This article has 23 additive terms, a bit too much.
  • Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”
  • Temporal terms like “over the years”, “currently”, “now”, and “from time to time” often are too vague to be useful, but occasionally may be helpful. “I am now using a semi-bot to generate your peer review.”
• As is done in WP:FOOTNOTE, for footnotes, the footnote should be located right after the punctuation mark, such that there is no space inbetween. For example, change blah blah [2]. to blah blah.[2]
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that the it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 2a.

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions (and the javascript checklist; see the last paragraph in the lead) for further ideas. Thanks, Andy _t 00:33, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

I made a run through this. Rlevse 00:52, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

After a serious try to put some more compliance into the article, I'm still in the sincere impression that this article is not there yet. Issues that are blocking a succesful GA nomination are, in my humble opinion:

• Is Scouting a formal organization or a movement? This is dubious already in the lead text and also throughout the article. Personally I'd say the Scouting article should be about the movement and not the organization of it.
• There should definitely be more about what one actually does in Scouting, such as camping (not even mentioned in the article!), woodcrafts and stuff.
• The scout shop section is out of place in an encyclopedic article
• The breakaway/nonaligned section is much overweight in a Scouting article.

These issues are rather wide, I know, and much beyond some ccompliancy recommendations from the automated script. Yet, I recommend they be taken care of for a Good Article. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 21:14, 8 July 2006 (UTC).

Sometimes I can't see the forest because of the trees. Good points. I reworked the lead so that it addresses your 1st and 2nd points more. As for the shop, yea probably, but I can live with it in. As for breakaway, maybe, but I think it's historically and factually important to keep it all in to reduce confusion about what we are and are not. Rlevse 21:30, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Wim wrote: There should definitely be more about what one actually does in Scouting - I support him on this. The article lacks any content on the Scout method which is basic for both WOSM and WAGGGS members as well as for break-away traditional Scouts. Only Law and Promise are mentioned but even there no background informations are given.

The article describes Scouting as an educational movement but doesn't offer informations on its pedagogigs. If we want to reach GA there should be something really informative in this field. --jergen 10:39, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

As this should be one of our best articles, by all means add the parts you are concerned with. Rlevse 20:12, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Did more work on all this, especially Scout method....thoughts? Rlevse 17:15, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

• I always thought you had it in you: this are indeed improvements. The one point I'd think fairly important and yet relatively easy to solve would be consistency of terminology: Either call it Scouting or Scout movement or Scouting movement. And use that for all appearances in the article (may need some small copy-edits in a few paragraphs). Actually I would recommend Scouting movement, but then I'm no editor at this time. And it might induce an article move... Wim van Dorst (Talk) 19:17, 10 July 2006 (UTC).

Once I started, it kind of hit me what you were looking for. I'd rather leave it Scouting as far more people are familiar with that, I feel, than the other terms. I'll put a "also" in the lead. Rlevse 19:29, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

PS: Scout Movement already redirects here and changing it back would probably mess up lots of links. Rlevse 19:32, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

• This is a step forward, and in my humble opinion just enough for GA. Jergen, what do you think? And I strongly recommend a long PR time for further improvement. Not real soon now, as I'm busy with some other article. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 20:42, 10 July 2006 (UTC).

Regarding movement: Per the West biography, Edgar Robinson is probably the first American to refer to Scouting as a movement. In this context, a movement is dynamic and goal-oriented where an organization is static. You would participate in a movement, not belong to an organization. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 16:54, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

discrimination?

why isn't the homosexuality/atheist controversy covered here?

Justforasecond 05:56, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

You are most likely referring to BSA controversey, and in the BSA article there is a section on it as well as subarticle link to the Boy Scouts of America membership controversies article. This Scouting article that you left this message on is an international article, not just a BSA article. Rlevse 10:44, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Recommendations for A-Class

To give the editors something to grind on, here are a few recommendations (subjectively, I agree) for further improvements.

• The article should be build up around topics (sections?) such as:
  • History: part of it is in the Origins section, but it should follow the time line of B-P: military, Afrika, Aids to Scouting, Seton's book, Brownsea camp, Scouting for Boys.
  • Growth of the movement: Girl guides and his sister, other type of scouts, Cubs and Kipling, leader training and woodbadges, internationalization and Olave.
  • What Scouts do: outdoor, camping and hiking, sports, fun, Jamborees, etc, to show that Scouting is a pleasure to be with, a hobby. The section is merely to be supported by Scout method (which article needs a turn around as well: it first mentioned the method and then what it is all about), but is not the main.
  • Uniform, insignia, oath, and other rituals
  • Data about formal organizations WOSM and WAGGGS size and internationalization (I like the table)
  • Co-education and various controversies in Scouting (difficult section for NPOV)
  • See also/Ref/Links.
• Move all those military breakaway and nonaligned organizations out, either to the trashbin or a separate article.
• Include the sections info into the second section I mentioned.
• Importantly, we should decide whether this article is about a Boy Scout (which gets redirected here), viz. a boy and a person, or about the movement, viz. an organization, etc. Both topics warrant separate articles in my opinion. Having both items in here clutters it.
• And there are probably some left-over recommendations from the peerreviewer script.

So, Randy, that'll keep you busy for some time, so that I can work on the BP Houses. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 22:59, 17 July 2006 (UTC).

Thanks, yep. This article definitely needs to be about the movement vice a Scout. I do not agree with rm'ing the non-aligned, breakaway part, those are still part of the movement.Rlevse 01:15, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

While driving in the car (hothothot) today, I thought vague thoughts about WP, and considered how to deal with improving this article. And then I had the following idea. A split:

• Scouting movement: the core of this article, with all the history, internationalization, adult leadership, co-ed, and world organizations and (as you insist) some words about deviation thereof.
• Scout or Boy Scout: the other half of the article, enlarged, about the person, uniform, insignia, ranking (up to the level of Crown Scout or similar), the various sections sea/air scouts, and a reference to the female varieties (which are mainly in Girl Guides.

Doing a split makes is much easier to get focus and direction in the article, which currently —as pointed out before— balances on two lines of thought. Just a thought. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 21:20, 18 July 2006 (UTC).

Plan of attack

While starting on this a moment ago, it dawned on me that there is no generic overview article on the Boy Scout (age 11-18 group) program at the international level (which is why I linked in the BSA version as the main one for now); but the other programs do have such an article. I think this is because of the history of this Scouting article. My plan is to add in all this stuff, organize it, then look it over and make a generic overview article on the Boy Scout level of the movement, using pretty much the elements Wim suggested for a split. Rlevse 16:45, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

• The lack of a Boy Scout article of its own is exactly my point. I'm glad you see it now too. Fortunately, there's plenty of stuff in this article here to work with. It looks like you're on a good path now, so go for it. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 19:18, 20 July 2006 (UTC).
  • That's also a side benefit of my having just rated the vast majority of the project articles myself-;) Rlevse 20:06, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Changes to Co-educational Scouting

Two annotations to my changes:

• WAGGGS defines itself as a movement of "girls and women", but it admits co-educational organizations as members - even if they don't have WOSM membership for their male members. Some European examples are: Slovenia, Spain, Greece.
• There is also at least one organization that has both WOSM- and WAGGGS-membership for all members (male and female): Verband Christlicher Pfadfinderinnen und Pfadfinder in Germany. Thus, one more badge on my uniform. --jergen 08:11, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Newer Peer ReviewScouting

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and may or may not be accurate for the article in question.

• Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at WP:LEAD. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.
• Per WP:MOSNUM, there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 18mm, use 18 mm, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 18 mm.
• Per WP:CONTEXT and WP:BTW, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006, but do not link January 2006.
• Per WP:MOS#Headings, headings generally do not start with the word "The". For example, ==The Biography== would be changed to ==Biography==.
• Per WP:MOS#Headings, headings generally should not repeat the title of the article. For example, if the article was Ferdinand Magellan, instead of using the heading ==Magellan's journey==, use ==Journey==.
• Per WP:WIAFA, this article's table of contents (ToC) maybe too long- consider shrinking it down by merging short sections or using a proper system of daughter pages as per WP:SS.
• Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
  • While additive terms like “also”, “in addition”, “additionally”, “moreover”, and “furthermore” may sometimes be useful, overusing them when they aren't necessary can instead detract from the brilliancy of the article. This article has 21 additive terms, a bit too much.
  • Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”
  • Temporal terms like “over the years”, “currently”, “now”, and “from time to time” often are too vague to be useful, but occasionally may be helpful. “I am now using a semi-bot to generate your peer review.”
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that the it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 2a.

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Rlevse 21:01, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Membership table

When was this data retrieved from the said ref? It isn't up todate (mostly because I edited the source table regarding The Scout Association of Hong Kong I'm working on. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 23:41, 23 July 2006 (UTC).

Not sure. The most accurate figures are probably at this WOSM site (dated Sept. 2005) but those figures do not agree with these. I will note that the US figures on this page include those who sign up for the Learning for Life program (which in the US is not considered part of the Scout program) and the Indonesian figures also include some in programs who do not make a scout like promise. (see World Scout Membership 1990-2000). In addition these are WOSM figures and may not include WAGGGS members even though they belong to the same National organization. The table should cite a source and date. --Erp 01:29, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

I made an update according to http://www.scout.org/satw/countries.shtml. All these numbers are only approximative (Note the rising numbers for the US, Canada, France and the UK; AFAIK all these are complainig about mebership decline). Also the WOSM-website (as well as WAGGGS' own) isn't really reliable: Some NSO give quite different numbers on their own websites (eg Austria: WOSM 13,785 + WAGGGS 10,508; website 85,000 [6]; the same for Hong Kong: 74,147 vs. 100,233). I propose we should use only [7] as a source for consistency. If necessary we may add notes for details, differing numbers or other problems. --jergen 07:03, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

• Thanks for the updating, but this significant rise in numbers is very surprising. Is the WOSM table seriously reliable enough to be presented here. I don't question its authority, but I do question its validity. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 08:29, 24 July 2006 (UTC).

Well, the WOSM table is the only consistent source (and for quite a number of associations the only) but I wouldn't describe it as reliable. If you add the numbers up there are only 26 million Scouts while WOSM's mainpage speaks of 28 million members.

There are some points that may lead to this surprising rise of membership:

• For most industrialized countries the fee is really low (max. CHF 1.147), so it wouldn't be quite a problem to pay for non-existant members [8], while poorer associations may give lower numbers according to this source .
• There is also an upper limit for fees: No NSO has to pay for more than 1 million members. (eg the BSA with a rise of 1.9 million members does pay the same as before.)
• Seconding this is the demand for rising (or stable) membership (alternatively a review of both program and structures should take place) formulated by the World Scout Bureau in its proposal on the "Governance of WOSM" [9]

Thus the rise in membership doesn't really affect the finances of the "richer" associations but avoids the review of program and structures. --jergen 09:26, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Given this unreliability, would a drastic change of data presentation in the Scouting article be called for, e.g., make a new table, combining both WOSM and WAGGGS numbers into a table presenting more realistic values for the top 15? Then the ListOfWOSM page with the WOSM table is then presenting authoritative numbers (albeit unreliable), and Scoutign article is present realistic overall numbers, albeit in less detail (e.g., all numbers rounded to 100k or even 1000k). Wim van Dorst (Talk) 09:47, 24 July 2006 (UTC).

This is a typical European viewpoint but I'd like to second it ;-). Typical European since it sees Scouting and Guiding as the two faces of a coin. But we should wait for some comments from the US...

Also this poses some problems:

• The numbers for WAGGGS are as reliable as those for WOSM and date mostly from 2003.
• Should we combine countries with split organizations into one entry? (eg BSA + GSUSA = USA)
• There are some associations where all Scouts and Guides are members of both WAGGGS and WOSM, so we can't just add up the numbers (eg one of Germany's associations, France?).
• I don't think we should reduce details to 1000k; it may even be difficult with 100k.

I'll prepare a proposal in my user namespace at User:Jergen/workshop/Table Scouting around the World. --10:02, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

The same should apply to List of World Organization of the Scout Movement members and to List of World Association of Girl Guides and Girl Scouts members. --jergen 07:03, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

As for what source to use for numbers, I don't care as long as it's a reputable source, WOSM, WAGGGS, whatever. I do agree that for countries like the US, you need to count both BSA and GSUSA and for Germany, not to count them twice. This leaves the question of what to do with organizations not so affiated, like the traditional scouting movement....? Rlevse 11:49, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Traditional Scouting as well as other unaffiliated organizations don't have a real impact in most countries. Membership of WFIS is about 30,000 and of UIGSE about 70,000, so traditional Scouting may have 200,000 to 300,000 members worldwide. A bigger problem are the Scout-like organizations (ie Royal Rangers, Pathfinders). RR has about 250,000 members and Pathfinders about 2.6 million. Should we include them?

I'll include traditional Scouting for Germany (+ 90,000), France (+ 40,000) and Italy (+ 30,000; all estimated) in my proposal. Please feel free to comment. --jergen 13:27, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Jergen, that is an excellent table! Recommended for immediate inclusion into the Scouting article, with appropriate refs, of course. Top 20 or just Top 15? Wim van Dorst (Talk) 23:10, 24 July 2006 (UTC).

I started with to 15 and came upon a number of countries with the same membership (before including non-aligned Scouts and Guides). So I expanded the table to top 20 to avoid choosing between countries the same size...

I'd like to insert the top 20 table: It's less Asia centred and shows better the worldwide movement. --jergen 08:44, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Added som refs --jergen 09:01, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

A-Class? Ok, but hold for FAC some weeks

Well done, Randy: a heck of an improvement. The other things I know your working on such as Boy Scouts and similar, are also very good ideas. May I recommend that you hold on for FAC for this article as I really would like to participate in ironing out all those (minor?) details, e.g., the peerreviewer script's non-compliance issues, and nice details about the early history (I've learned a bit on the Scouting for Boys article research I'm doing. I actually expect to receive a (reprinted) copy of the real first six publications soon (next few weeks, when I'm out probably). And these information needs to be corrected in this Scouting article too, of course. And it may surprise you that the article needs some de-americanization too?Wim van Dorst (Talk) 22:58, 24 July 2006 (UTC).

Sure.Rlevse 10:22, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

USA number inflated?

Jergen et al, the BSA number (6.2 million) is indeed as reported on the WOSM list, but on the BSA page and their links they only mention a (still large) 3 million members. Even added 1.5 million scout leaders, I'd be at 4.5 million male members. With 3.7 million girl guides (incl leaders), the USA number should then be at 8.2 million, not over 10 million. Who explains the difference? Wim van Dorst (Talk) 21:21, 26 July 2006 (UTC).

Perhaps BSA includes in its reports to WOSM the participants of Learning for Life? They are not included in the statistics at the BSA page, since this isn't a real Scouting program.

As written above - these numbers aren't very reliable. One million members more or less doesn't affect the fee paid to WOSM, but a stable or growing organization avoids the otherwise necessary review of programm and structures. --jergen 21:35, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

The BSA figures do include Learning for Life. The table may need footnotes for individual countries to explain how the figures were calculated in each case. Also the BSA figures do include some women and girls (girls can join Venturers). The GSUSA figures include male leaders. I don't think we want to distinguish between male/female but rather WOSM/WAGGGS affiliate membership.--Erp 00:39, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

The table has explanatory footnotes where necessary. The rest uf the numbers are just sums of the numbers given by WOSM and WAGGGS (see note 14). And it's not of concern if there are girls included in the BSA or so on... A distinguition in WOSM membership, WAGGGS and non-aligned would make the table far to complex to understand - its purpose is to show how many Scouts/Guides can be found in a country and not do describe the Scout movement in a country in every single detail. --jergen

Agreed we shouldn't separate by sex; I wasn't clear. I was referring back to Wimvandorst's comment which included 'male' in it. Do we have a comment that membership includes both adults and youth? Also we may want to a footnote on the USA number that this does include Learning for Life membership because I guarantee someone is going to notice otherwise. --Erp 21:11, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Decline

There is a definete decline in the number of scout groupd (cubs/scouts, all of them). Many groups are closing in the UK

not sure when this comment was written, or who wrote it - but Scouting is flourishing in most parts of the world. There is also a reversal in decline in some parts of the UK now, especially in the Beaver and Cub sections. Horus Kol 08:11, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Scout Den

Where practicable weekly section meetings are held in local centres known as scout dens. These can be owned and operated by local scou groups, lent by local community organisations or religious sponsors, parish/community or sports halls. Often scout groups obtain land/materials/labour at favourable costs due to their charitable status.good squishee 15:36, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

In the UK, the meeting place is usually called a 'Scout Hut', not a den. DuncanHill 00:06, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

In South Africa the meeting place is usually called a 'Scout Hall' Jediwannabe 06:11, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

co-education

I was thinking that merging the co-ed bit to prior the table and current situation as it explains how the current situation came about. Also how appropriate is the word 'co-educational' in this situation? --Erp 15:09, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

I think 'mixed' would be more common usage in the UK. DuncanHill 15:55, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

You may want to add wording or change wording prior to the table but I think there are enough details on co-ed/mixed Scouting to justify putting it in a separate section or subsection. --Jagz 20:37, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

I changed the section location. --Jagz 20:45, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

NPoV?

This article seems a bit PoV... For instance: "...whose aim is to develop young people physically, spiritually and mentally so that youth may take a constructive place in society." I suppose it should read "whose declared aim is".
"This is achieved through..." It should be "According to the movement, this is achieved through..." or simply "This should be achieved through..."
Velho 01:13, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Feel free to edit thusly. Rlevse 01:16, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

I see the case for the second edit (and followed through - see what you think of it)... I'm not sure about the first one, though - seems a bit redundant to put in declared, because aren't all aims "declared"? Horus Kol 08:55, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Homosexuality

Addition of the offical BSA policy on homosexuality with reference to BSA website

Please sign your comments. Reverted, Scouting not BSA. John Reaves 07:18, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

The problem about mention of the BSA policy on homosexuals is that for balance you should also add the policy of other scouting organisations. Many differ significantly from that of BSA. Then the whole article gets too large. It is a BSA problem. It is not a UK problem. It is not an Australian problem. --Bduke 12:14, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

• And it isn't a Dutch problem nor a German problem, nor any other European or Asian country's as far as I can tell. It is only the USA that is taking this odd POV. Or is there another country which makes this an issue? Wim van Dorst (Talk) 18:23, 20 November 2006 (UTC).

• It's not a South African problem Jediwannabe 10:44, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
• The other countries (I think) where it is not possible to be scout and gay are the counties where homosexuality is criminal. --Egel _Reaction? 12:59, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Brownie Scouts?

I admire the ambition to bring the Scouting article to a more generic form, but Brownie Scouts? Horus Kol 09:43, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I think the whole Section section is a mess. Trying to divide the age groups and tacking in each country doesn't work. For eample, Brownies in the GSUSA are in troops, not packs. It would be better if this were cut down and noted that each organization does it differently. It might also be better if all of the Jungle Book terms were moved to a different section. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 10:08, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I think the hardest part here is the age ranges - they're all over the place in different organisations... Horus Kol 10:40, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

The exact age ranges, the names of the units and sub-units are not important. I think, important are the existence of sub-units, the level of self-goverment/leadership/hierarchy, the importance of the tale (The Jungle Book / Friends of the Forest) and the activities. The things that are same on the world, but differ between the age groups. --Egel _Reaction? 15:06, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I just about think that we could have a separate article such as The Jungle Book and Scouting. Each of the Jungle Book characters has a short blurb on Scouting, but I think it would work better as a whole. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 15:35, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

The Jungle Book doesn't apply to Brownies (at least in the United Kingdom)... actually, looking through all of this, there is a lot things wrong with many of the sections in this article - Beaver Scouts do have a sub-unit of the colony - the lodge (as an example). This article is not really generic - it has been written by someone who has given an obvious bias to Scouting (as opposed to Guiding) in the US (as opposed to the rest of the world) - and then someone has tried to apply a veneer of generality to it. This is not a gripe, but an observation. I would be happy to help make this article generic - but I think we need to spend some time in a sandbox before fixing the article... If I make a start, would anyone else be happy to copyedit? Horus Kol 15:42, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Go for it. As I recall, there was a lot of BSA stuff in here at one time, so I believe you are correct in that observation. I don't believe the Girl Scouts/Guides use any of the Jungle Book mythos. In the US it has become rather diffused and syncretized with American Indian customs. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 16:08, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

HOrus--go for it. I agree the Cub and pre-Cub sections need work especially. I think the rest of the article is better, but could be tweaked too. I want to get this to FA, so the better we can make it before FAC submission, the better. Rlevse 20:54, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

There are Scouting/Guiding organisations with a separate "Girl Cub" (Welpinnen) program: Europascouts and Guides Belgium and maybe others. --Egel _Reaction? 09:31, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry - I've been out on site for a couple of days, so not had much opportunity to get started... hopefully have something by the end of the week - Egel, that kind of information is great... I just hope that we can get it all together into something that is meaningful and relevant. Horus Kol 14:05, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Actually - having just read through the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Scouting#Scout.2FGuide_or_Boy_Scout.2FGirl_Scout_equality I have no idea on how to proceed with this now... Horus Kol 16:09, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry - I stared at it on Saturday, and come to the realisation that I couldn't see what to do with it... sorry guys... Horus Kol 09:03, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

No problem, I took a shot at cleaning this up. I also listed "The Jungle Book in Scouting" as a requested article on our project page. I think we still need more refs for Scouting, so I'll work on that. We also need to fix the switching btwn Brit and American English.Rlevse 20:01, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

• Actually the section on age groups has lost all relevant content. It should at least mention the standard models developped during BPs lifetime for boys and girls with the original names, preferable in a table like this example - the central pedagogic aims for each age group should also be included:

Ages	Scouting	Guiding
7 to 10	Cub Scout	Brownie Guide
11 to 17	Boy Scout	Girl Guide or Girl Scout
18 to 25	Rover Scout	Ranger Guide

• In a second step (ans only if we don't reintroduce the deletd content) we need a detailed article Age Groups in Scouting and Guiding. This would be the right place to mention all the different structures that are now listed in this overview.
• The section on adults is far to long compared to the section on youth members. Scouting is primarily for youth.
• The different branches like Sea Scouts, Air Scouts, Extension Scouts should also be mentioned in this sections; actually they can only be found under history. --jergen 08:47, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

With the additions others have made since I did mine what I just did, the youth section is now longer than the adult one. I also added age ranges last night. I do not agree it's lost all relevant content. That's really a stretch. Assuming the table you made is the model and names BP originally came up with, I've added it, but I certainly wouldn't go beyond that as then we'd be back where we were. I have no problem with an age groups article and have added it to our Requested articles. Once it's created, we can make it a main link on this page. Your last item has been addressed by Horus Kol. Rlevse 11:04, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

The section is much better now. Thanks to all contributors. --jergen 09:16, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Got the article done... got the references to the parallel programmes done... About the adult section in this article - how about a new article for Adults in Scouting? Horus Kol 09:25, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I support this idea but we should remember that "Adults in Scouting" is also a organisational program by WOSM aimed even at youth leaders... --jergen 10:51, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

An "Adults in Scouting" article would be fine with me, but how would it be different from Scout leader? Rlevse 10:59, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Not all adults in Scouting are uniformed leaders... there are the executive positions at all levels, skills instructors, training and development teams, Fellowships, etc... Horus Kol 11:08, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Ah yes. Rlevse 11:21, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Edit spree

Hi, all, I did some copy-editing to the Scouting article, to put it in such a shape that at least the peerreviewer script accepts it. However, that is merely for technicalities, such as spelling, referencing, word use, etc. It is now close to midnight here, and I'm off to bed. For next action, I would like to suggest that we specifically give the 'Age groups or sections' chapter some serious attention, as that is one of the core sections of the article. In each subsection there, I'd like to see more prose improvements. Tomorrow, I'll give it further attention myself. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 22:45, 3 December 2006 (UTC).

Excellent work Wim. I noticed the section that starts "Ranger Guide" says nothing about the Guides. Does the person that added this know anything about it? Rlevse 22:52, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Language

Hi, Randy, American English the standard? Long ago? You added it not even a month ago to those Rules and Standards. And I could find any discussion nor arguments to substantiate the proposal. And whichever language you choose, at least do it consistently throughout the article (I did). Wim van Dorst (Talk) 21:24, 4 December 2006 (UTC).

OK, maybe it wasn't that long ago-;). I had a senior moment. There was discussion, but I don't recall where it was. A similar talk is going on at Religion in Scouting. Rlevse 21:36, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

• That the religion article it written in US-English is fine with me, as that is again a topic mainly focusing on the US side of Scouting. There is no religion debate here, and B-P hasn't spent much time about it either. So for me (and B-P) that isn't an important topic. But Scouting is so international that I can't see the reason to but is any other language than B-P's. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 21:50, 4 December 2006 (UTC).

Section Age groups and sections

Where did all its content go? I see the actual very short paragraph as really insufficient; it's nothing but a listing of some of the possible age groups. It's quite clear that Scouting was started for only one age group - but today there is more. As far as I know not one of all existing organizations centers only on the Scout/Guide age, no, quite contrary: Estimations by WOSM give 30% to 50% Cub Scouts.

What happened to Extension Scouting? Where is it mentioned? Or are we just suggesting that it was closed?

These changes result - in my eyes - in a massive loss of information. If we work further in this direction we should soon change the rating to B. --jergen 21:30, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

BTW: I included "Ranger Guides", which is directed at the same age group as "Rover Scouts". But it's Guiding, so it can be removed in this (male) Scouting centered project. --jergen 21:30, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

See the Brownie Scouts thread above. The issues you mention are precisely what they're talking about---which boil down to too much detail and trying to cover every program and every age group in all the large countries, which is impossible in such an article. A balance needs to be found. There is no way this is a B article. This article should summarize and point to other articles, not bog down in detail, which is why Wim moved most of the breakaway section out. Rlevse 21:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

If there is no article on Extenstion Scouting and it's not the same as Explorers, Rovers, etc, my suggestion is to create it and link to it from here like those articles are. Rlevse 21:45, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Never herd about red links like Extension Scouting or Ranger Guide? They are allowed, they are useful, they indicate missing important content and it's no problem - even for featured articles - to have some in an article. Pls see Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links)#Form: When there is not yet an article about that subject, good links will make the creation of a correctly named article much easier for later writers. --jergen 08:22, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I think this section of the article is pretty much there - the information about all those sections/age groupings should be in their own relevant articles, but it is good to mention the programs/sections in this article like we have... I have added links to Air Scouts and Sea Scouts, the aforementioned Extension Scouting (and the UK version - Scoutlink). Horus Kol 09:43, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

While I think the section on ages is really good now, I will work on more refs over the next few days. If anyone who is knowledgeable can at least make stubs for the ones that are redlinks, I'd really appreciate it. Rlevse 11:14, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I do not recall when the table was added. I have just reverted Venture Scoiut back to Rover Scout. I think the table should go as being hopelessly not representing the situation in every country, or at least it should be labelled as saying these are B-P's original ages and sections. What do people think? --Bduke 10:11, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

The table of course does not perfectly represent the real world because there are too many variations from country to country, which is why it says "The exact age ranges for programs vary by country and association." I think also it said represented B-P's orginal age groupings at one time. The table came about because trying to explain all this in prose is even messier than the table and leaving out any mention of age groupings leaves a hole, so I think the table should stay, definitely. It's okay with me if a clause is added about the original groupings by B-P again.Rlevse 10:59, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

The table is fine, specially since it matches the current South African Scout Association ages Jediwannabe 06:29, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Group or District

I would think these would be capitalized only when they refer to a specific unit. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 21:36, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

• Capitalizing all those words (Scouts and Scouter included) is an Americanism. B-P never did that, so I'd prefer not to add the words group and district to the list I have already been made to accept. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 21:52, 4 December 2006 (UTC).

If I say "I saw a group of Scouts" or "There are Scouts in many districts of the city" it is small "g" or "d", but a Scout Group is talking about a specific organisational entity and I think that is capital "G" in general as well as when one talks about the "159th Sheffield Scout Group". I think the same applies to Scout Districts. They are specific. Well they are in some countries and I think it is those the references are to. --Bduke 22:15, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Upper casing of Scouting is not solely American, see this from the Brits: [10], specifically "Facts about adults in Scouting". Rlevse 22:36, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I have been a Scout and Scouter for many years now, in the UK... also, I have belonged to a Group and to groups... English is just odd like that. I apologise that we didn't come up with something more logical, but all these Romans and Saxons kept on invading us :P Horus Kol 09:01, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

A scout is someone sent to find things out (armies and football clubs have them), a Scout is a member of the worldwide organization founded by BP. A Group is an administrative unit of Scouting in the UK (and possibly elsewhere), a group is several of anything. British people can actually hear the capital letters! DuncanHill 14:09, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Right- Scout in this context is capitalized. We don't have groups in the BSA, but we do have districts. Unit designation such as pack, troop, team, crew or ship are lower case unless referring to a specific unit. Examples:

• The troop is going camping.
• Come camping this weekend with Troop 84. (We just get numbers in the US :-)

The same with districts, councils, areas and regions:

• Please attend the district meeting.
• Welcome to Valley District.
• Please call the district executive.
• Distict Executive Smith attended the meeting.

"National" is capitalized in the BSA because it always refers to the National Council of the Boy Scouts of America. References:

• Wikipedia:Naming conventions (capitalization)
• Scouting Terms and Style - the BSA style guide

I'm not going to belabor the point if it is done differently elsewhere, I just want to understand. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 14:35, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Actually, because of the use of the definite article, the District Executive is capitalised (at least in UK English). On the other hand, a district executive, or some district executives, are not. Similarly, specific Scout groups - like 89th Reading Scout Group or simply the Group are capitalised - Scout groups as a group of groups (um...) are not. Horus Kol 10:19, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

World peace

Is world peace a goal of the Scouting movement? --Jagz 01:01, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

It was one of B-P's visions that Scouting could help bring world peace. Too bad it hasn't happened. I'll find out if it's a WOSM goal too. Rlevse 01:44, 10 December 2006 (UTC)...that didn't take long, see [11]. Rlevse 01:45, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't think it is a BSA goal though. If it is, it is only a goal in writing and not in practice. The exception being the indirect benefit that just attending a World Jamboree brings. I don't know if the discontinued World Brotherhood merit badge had any significantly different requirements than the Citizenship in the World merit badge along these lines. I know that The Scout Association in the UK has a World Faiths badge that Scouts can work towards (they learn about religious faiths other than their own) but the BSA has nothing like it for example. --Jagz 02:10, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Venturing has something new though.[12] --Jagz 06:14, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

The Scout Assocation of the UK has, as one of the Scout Laws "A Scout is a member of the Worldwide Family of Scouting"... we also have International and Faith programmes which promote tolerance and understanding of other cultures. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Horus Kol (talk • contribs) 09:19, 11 December 2006 (UTC).

Mission Statement

http://www.scout.org/en/content/download/3910/34727/file/UnderstandingMission_E.pdf (108k)

"The mission of Scouting is to contribute to the education of young people, through a value system based on the Scout Promise and Law, to help build a better world where people are self-fulfilled as individuals and play a constructive role in society.

This is achieved by

• involving them throughout their formative years in a non-formal educational process

• using a specific method that makes each individual the principal agent in his or her development as a selfreliant, supportive, responsible and committed person

• assisting them to establish a value system based upon spiritual, social and personal principles as expressed in the Promise and Law."

Shouldn't this be mentioned in the article at some point? Horus Kol 15:27, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Should go in the WOSM article, since it's the mission of this specific organization. --jergen 15:47, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

But all member organisations follow this mission, in one form or another, don't they? Horus Kol 16:28, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

That applies only when seein Guiding as an distinct movement; http://www.wagggs.org/en/about/scouting gives as mission: to enable girls and young women to develop their fullest potential as responsible citizens of the world. It is close to WOSM but not quite the same, note especially the gender orientation. --jergen 16:49, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Spirituality

I noticed in the review talk someone made an objection to the "spiritual" aspect of Scouting - resulting in the removal of this aspect from the introduction. I argue that this should be back in there, as the objection seems to result from a confusion of religion with spirituality... The WOSM mission statement (above) clearly shows spiritual development to be on a par with personal and social development... and The Scout Association mission statement goes further:

"The aim of the Association is to promote the development of young people in achieving their full physical, intellectual, social and spiritual potential, as individuals, as responsible citizens and as members of their local, national and international communities.

The Method of achieving the Aim of the Association is by providing an enjoyable and attractive scheme of progressive training, based on the Scout Promise and Law, and guided by adult leadership."

http://www.scouts.org.uk/aboutus/mission.htm

I'm sure most people will be aware of the policies with the BSA and some other organisations if they have been involved in recent discussions with the controversies articles and also the Scouting in Religion article... Horus Kol 15:45, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Baden-Powell himself said,

“ There is no Religious side to the Movement, the whole of it is based on religion, that is on the realisation and service of God. ”

[13]. Scouting is not a religious Movement, but religion (or more accurately spirituality) is a integral part of Scouting no matter what country you are in. Jediwannabe 06:21, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Exactly, which is why it should be back in there... Horus Kol 08:54, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

New article?

I'm thinking about starting a new article that will be linked to this one. It will discuss Scouting problems, criticisms, and controversies by country. The format will be similar to the Scout Promise and Scout Law articles. People from different countries can add information pertinent to their country. Does this sound reasonable or is the United States the only country with problems, criticisms, or controversies? --Jagz 21:11, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

• What about Boy Scouts of America controversies? And yes it is only the US where this this is considered relevant. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 21:21, 12 December 2006 (UTC).

I find that hard to believe, that the BSA and USA is the only org/country in the world with Scouting controversies, problems, criticisms of any kind. Rlevse 21:26, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Most other countries with a controversiaal Scouting organisation have other less controversiaal Scouting organisations too. In most countries you can be (allmost) atheist, agnostic, and/or homosexual and Scout. So in most countries there no reason to have much controversies, problems, criticisms. --Egel _Reaction? 22:28, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

That means there are some organizations with at least some degree of controversey, though perhaps less well-known to others. Rlevse 23:02, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Some controversies: [14] (the links under World Scouting), but the most controversies are the other way around. --Egel _Reaction? 00:03, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

I suspect there isn't enough to make a good overarching article. A category might be more appropriate (with a subcategory for just BSA controversy related articles).--Erp 01:20, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

The uniform is is one of the few aspects of Scouting that has some controversies, problems, criticisms in the Netherlands and probable the rest of Europe, because people easily associate uniforms with military and fascist youth movements.That is one of the reasons that the European Scouting uniforms are so colorfull. --Egel _Reaction? 08:41, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

What about this for example? WOSM-Eurasian Region controversies --Jagz 00:45, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

That's interesting... I have to admit that there have been problems/schisms in Scouting in the UK at times - the creation of the BP Scouts was a reaction to the 1960s review... other times, its down to local interest groups setting up a Scout Group but then setting their own agenda against Scouting POR. But these are mostly low-scale, local issues - not because of major policy issues like those in the BSA or the Eurasian articles.. Horus Kol 09:42, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

• Here is something from the Scouts Canada article:

Some members of Scouts Canada are upset with Scouts Canada's governance structure, which does not include any elections in which the membership may take part. In response, Scouter Mike Reid from Montreal, Quebec founded in August, 2004 an committee called SCOUT eh! which is a group of "registered Scouts Canada members from across Canada dedicated to transforming Scouts Canada into a democratic association".

In 1998, the Baden-Powell Scouts (BPSA) were established in Canada, rejecting the modernization of the Scout method by WOSM and Scouts Canada. Scouts Canada challenged the association and successfully argued that the word "Scout", in the context of a youth organization, is a trademark held by Scouts Canada. --Jagz 18:43, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Is this of concern for Scouting as a whole? Don't think so. --jergen 19:35, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I think there are enough worldwide Scouting problems to be worthy of a separate article. --Jagz 20:56, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Are there any suggestions for the name of the proposed article? It's better to decide now than having to change the name of the article later. How about, "International Scouting problems and controversies"? --Jagz 21:17, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

The new article is named Scouting controversies and concerns. It needs to be expanded by the addition of Scouting problems and controversies from countries and regions around the world. --Jagz 03:29, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

See Also section

I just have a few issues with the see also section, since this is a generic international Scouting article, should there really be links to Eagle Scout (BSA and Philippines), Queen's Scout, Philmont Scout Ranch etc.

List of notable Scouts, Oldest Scout groups, Religion in Scouting, and Scout Prayer are fine. Maybe we should also also add Scout Promise, Scout Law, WOSM, WAGGGS (as well as the other world wide Scout organisations). Basically keep the See Also section only for international pages (I seem to recall that this was decided upon a while ago). Since this article is going for FA I didn't want to change this with out a consensus Jediwannabe 12:28, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

I see that there is a International Scouting template at the bottom of the article, so links to international organisations aren't needed. Jediwannabe 12:30, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Good point, I just took out the Eagles, Queen, and Philmont. Promise and Law are already linked so don't need to be in See Also. Let's keep it international. Do we have a "Highest ranks" article? I think that'd be okay in See also.Rlevse 12:45, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

There is a List of highest awards in Scouting which is in desperate need of a rearrangement - I was thinking along the lines of the table at Age Groups in Scouting and Guiding, which I was going to do at the weekend. Horus Kol 13:06, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

I thought we had such an article, I'll add it to see also right now.Rlevse 13:23, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

I'll work on it tomorrow Jediwannabe 13:41, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Take a look at User:Jediwannabe/highest scout awards, let me know what you think Jediwannabe 05:46, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I like that. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 08:33, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I like it too, but better swap Country and Organisation, because it is better to have the Countries in alphabetical order. --Egel _Reaction? 08:45, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Looks good - as for sorting order... i have used the organisation name at Age Groups in Scouting and Guiding... if we decided to use a different sort order for User:Jediwannabe/highest scout awards, then can we make sure that the other article is brought in line... also, could we have some images of the awards where possible - add a bit of colour to the list? Horus Kol 09:15, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Looks good, but I also think countries should be on the left in alpha order.Rlevse 10:54, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I also think that it should be alpha order for countries. I'll add images of the awards to the table now. Jediwannabe 11:13, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I've added images to User:Jediwannabe/highest scout awards, not sure exactly where the images should go, but I think it looks good where it is now. Jediwannabe 11:20, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Looks good Jedi - good work Horus Kol 11:27, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Would you mind if I moved it over (or do you want to) - I think you have everyone in the table except Scouts Australia now... Horus Kol 13:59, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I take it you are moving this to List of highest awards in Scouting? --Gadget850 ( Ed) 14:21, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Will be moving it shortly Jediwannabe 06:13, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok, moved. Jediwannabe 06:31, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Wood badge

Would someone who knows about the Wood Badge training take a look at the reference to it in this article? The implication is that this is common to all types and branches of Scouting and I don't think that's true. Thanks. Kingbird 16:51, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Wood Badge seems to be pretty universal to Scouting - is there an equivalent in Guiding (or some Scouting organisations) that could be mentioned in the Scouting and Wood Badge articles? Horus Kol 16:56, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I know that Wood Badge exists in, literally, dozens of countries. I also know that in many of these countries Wood Badge is used in all levels of the boys side of the program--Cub, Scout, Explorer, etc. What I don't know about is if it's used on the girls side of the program. Does anyone know about WB and the girl side?Rlevse 16:57, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I called a Girl Scout person I know--she's also in BSA. She said GSUSA does not use WB. I don't know about other countries.Rlevse 17:07, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

As far as I know there is no common equivalent in Guiding; in most SAGNOs (Scouting And Guiding National Organizations) girls/women participate in the Woodbadge training, even if the association has split WOSM and WAGGGS membership.

Finland [15], Norway [16] and Sweden (see sv:Treklöver-Gilwellutbildning) have the Kolmiapila-Gilwell/Trekløver-Gilwell/Treklöver-Gilwell (Trefoil Gilwell) training as an "coeducational" equivalent of the WOSM-only Woodbadge training. The Swedish "fjäll" (mountains) course in autumn 2007 sounds really interesting [17]. --jergen 20:16, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Sounds like we should mention it's mostly a boys side thing with some female orgs using it with some female orgs having equivalents. In the BSA, there is an equivalent called Powder Horn just for the Venturing program.Rlevse 20:21, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Powder Horn is not Wood Badge for Venturing. Wood Badge is a leadership course for all leaders and Power Horn is a resource course for Venturing, Boy Scouting and Varsity Scouting. Sea Badge on the other hand is the Sea Scouting equivalent to Wood Badge (they just have to do their own thing :-) --Gadget850 ( Ed) 20:30, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Many would and have said Powder Horn is the equiv of WB and SB-;) Yes, I know Venture leaders go to WB. Rlevse 22:04, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Wood Badge is also avalable for the Sea Scout Leaders in addition to Sea Badge.

A few comments above use terminology like "boys' side of the programme", "girls' side..." etc. In many countries, Scouting is mixed, so there isn't a "Boys' or Girls' side". DuncanHill 11:37, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

We know, there are so many variations, it's often hard to word to please every one.Rlevse 13:53, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Scouting Controversies and Concerns article needs expansion

The Scouting controversies and concerns article needs to be expanded by the addition of Scouting problems and controversies (both historical and contemporary) from countries and regions around the world. --Jagz 21:29, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

• It has been pointed out many times before: this isn't an international issue: it is only the USA where these things are an issue. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 23:22, 28 December 2006 (UTC).

The scope of the article includes all significant Scouting controversies and problems worldwide since the Scout Movement began in the early 1900s. The USA's current controversy over homosexuals and atheists is just a small part of this. Try reading what is in the article so far. --Jagz 23:39, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

• You're right: it has been significantly expanded, well done. I hope you won't take it amiss that I however won't take in active interest in these IMHO petty issues. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 00:25, 29 December 2006 (UTC).

I'm sure they are not petty issues. --Jagz 02:47, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

So far the article has these countries or regions: Canada, Cuba, Eurasian Scout Region, Germany, Netherlands, Russia, and the United States. --Jagz 02:28, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I removed three of the newly added sections and shortend one because no controversies were mentioned. --jergen 10:25, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I have a bit of a worry about this article. There are masses of arguments. Are they all to be included? From my knowledge (WP:OR) - UK Advanced Party Report (end of Rovers, uniform changes, etc,) that lead to B-P Scouts; Australia - uniform changes. I'm only starting to get into this. What is a notable controversy? --Bduke 12:42, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

IMHO, a "SCOUTING" controversy is something that affects the "MOVEMENT", such membership, religios basis, should an association be coed, etc. An article on "SCOUTING CONTROVIES" should not include things like what uniform to wear, what the requirements for a certain rank in a certain association should be, etc.Rlevse 12:48, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I made some porposals on Talk:Scouting controversy and conflict#Proposal for some more content: In my eyes, controversies mentioned in this overview article should affect the movement as a whole - or at least a major part of it. Otherwise this article will sone become a duplication of the associations' articles - and thus would lead to an unusable mixture of local problems:

Is it really a major proble that Scouts Canada wants to sell some campgrounds? IMO only if the same controversy (including the deficits in internal democracy) rose in ten or more associations.

Can we continue this discussion on [[Talk:Scouting controversy and conflict#Scope of the article? --jergen 13:08, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Someone else can take the lead on the article or otherwise delete it. --Jagz 09:01, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
I made some changes to the Scouting controversy and conflict article so it focuses more on the issues. --Jagz 07:20, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

You created the article and now you want it deleted? I think it covers important areas. Rlevse 11:01, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Scouting organizations

See the following links:

• International Scouting Organizations
• Non-aligned Scouting Associations
• Unaffiliated Single Groups of Scouts
• Adult-only Scouting Associations
• Scout-like Organizations
• All Scouting Associations in Every Country
• --Jagz 21:45, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

All indeed interesting links. I have added the top one to External Links. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 23:27, 28 December 2006 (UTC).

Scouting made FA

This article made FA because of a TEAM EFFORT. Congrats to all who helped, including non-project members. This effort exemplifies wiki's best. No one person can take credit for this one.Rlevse 00:37, 31 December 2006 (UTC)