Talk:The Scouts/Guides Organisation (India)

The Scouts/Guides Organisation (India) is part of the Scouting WikiProject, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Scouting and Guiding on the Wikipedia. This includes but is not limited to boy and girl organizations, WAGGGS and WOSM organizations as well as those not so affiliated, country and region-specific topics, and anything else related to Scouting. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ScoutingWikipedia:WikiProject ScoutingTemplate:WikiProject ScoutingScouting articles

India

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles

suggestions

Any suggestions on better wording than my "is possibly defunct"? I don't want to stir the pot, but something is going on. Hate to add a "controversy" section to such a small article, but perhaps a "In 2018, the Telegraph of Calcutta reported that..."?--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 18:30, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Protected

There is an edit war going on with no discussion of the edit on the this page. Please discuss it here, and then perhaps the protection can be removed. --Bduke (talk) 04:09, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the issues arise from 2 separate places. There have been ongoing multiple deletions of one particular pieces of sourced text, and I've been one of two persons reverting those deletions. Despite requests and invitations to do so, the deleter(s) have not discussed it at all, nor even given edit summaries. More recently, I hand an IP follow me around and revert various unrelated uncontested edits of mine, include reverting additions to talk pages, with some nasty vague edit summaries (plus a response to my post on their talk page) that indicate some type of grudge. My first guess is that it may be related to me trying to help on a large scale link spamming campaign (details on my talk page)North8000 (talk) 13:27, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A series of IP have been removing this citation since October, I have been following them marking them as sockpuppets. Bduke I suggest leaving the citation in, then protecting the mainpage, otherwise the sanitizers get what they want. I have also to no avail put in now five requests for permanent page protection-their rationale is that it is not constant, though it is very steady.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 21:13, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I have added it back in, but at the end not in the first paragraph. This might get the anon editor to justify why he keeps removing a sourced sentence. If he does nothing until the protection ends and then reverts, I will add it back and permanently protect the page. --Bduke (talk) 22:01, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, the short version of my post is that the two 12/25/18 reverts of me probably relate to me and not the article.North8000 (talk) 12:59, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]