![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
I was disappointed to see that this article has had all the useful information gutted from it. It used to contain a complete listing of groups in each District, a number of which I had updated. This list was clear, easy to read and was extremely useful for driving interested parents and volunteers to the appropriate group websites. Moving this info to Scoutwiki is all well and good but most people attempting to find out about scouting are going to be using Wikipedia.
I was actually stunned to find out that the person who made all these changes doesn't even live in this hemisphere. How about people refrain from ruining useful recruitment tools for other people and stick to pages that relate to their own communities! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.236.68.211 ( talk) 21:53, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
In response to the IP editor, yes, I do live in Australia but I was involved in Scouting in the UK many years ago. But so what? WP is an international operation. I would add that there have been plenty of opportunities for UK editors to take a broad view of UK Scouting articles, but they have in recent times only edited stuff about their own back yard. This article has not had the list of Groups etc removed. They were never here. They were on individual County articles that were merged after a long discussion on the Scouting Project. As TimTay says they were just a directory. They were not properly sourced and changes, such as adding or deleting a Group were not sourced. WP is NOT intended to be a recruitment tool. I agree with TimTay about cutting the article down. It is disappointing that almost all activity on these region articles such as this one is about list of Gang Shows and the information on campsites. Where is the history, and the details of the impact of Scouting on the community? We are writing an encyclopedia. Please join us in that endeavor. -- Bduke (Discussion) 23:20, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
I find this article deeply unsatisfactory. The information for individual counties is split between various sections within the article, which makes it much harder for both readers interested in Scouting in a particular area, and for editors with information to add. The "official regions" of the UK are used by almost nobody except government, and are largely irrelevant for Scouting matters. I would suggest as a first step re-arranging this article into county-by-county subsections, which could then be the destinations of the various county redirects which currently have to point to the article as a whole. DuncanHill ( talk) 14:12, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
First, I did not say that we need to "report in the same way for different countries". I said we need to look at the wider question, if for no other reason than that all other members of the Scouting Project know what we are doing. However, we do need to treat all 9 articles about Scouting in England, along with the similar articles for Scotland, Wales and NI, in the same way. Second, I am well aware that "the governmental regions are virtually unknown to people in England". They are just a convenient way to break up the country as England would be too large. What would you suggest otherwise? Counties will not do. Scout counties do not always aline with government counties. Scout counties are just SA. As I mentioned, chapters of organisations have dificulty in justifying articles. There are also far too many. Anyway, I get the message that you do not like it. Before, we make any changes, you need to make clear what you think the purpose of the article is. The consensus was clear that it is not just about the Scout Association, although of course the bulk of the material will be about the SA. I think the lede and a history section should be general. I am sure that people in one county will be happy to learn about the history in nearby counties. I do not support splitting the history section into the county sections. If there is wider support to move the camp site and gang show material into the county sections, for all 12 articles, then of course I will support it. However I do not support doing it on just this one article. I am going to open up a new section at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scouting and point to it from the talk pages of all 12 region articles and maybe some other UK Scouting articles. Let us see what others think. -- Bduke (Discussion) 09:02, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
I have opened up a wider discussion on this topic at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scouting#Scouting in the regions of England, so please do not add to the discussion here. I will add a note to the talk pages of all the other 11 region articles, but it may take a while. -- Bduke (Discussion) 09:24, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
An IP editor has twice edited the lede to state that the second sentence only reads as "It is represented by the "Scout Association", making no reference to other Scouting organisations however minor. The situation is this. There is clear consensus that articles about a part of a country should not be about one organisation only. All other UK regional articles have a similar wording that mentions other organisations. For the first reason, these articles are not about Scouting in the Scout Association regions but about Scouting in the official government regions. However, I have no idea whether any Scout association other than the Scout Association is active in this region, although it seems likely that a few are. Even if none exist, there should be a mention of the possibility, but a change in wording might be appropriate. To the IP editor, I hope you now understand the situation, but if you still have concerns, please discuss them here. -- Bduke (Discussion) 07:21, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Scouting in South West England. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 03:19, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
I was disappointed to see that this article has had all the useful information gutted from it. It used to contain a complete listing of groups in each District, a number of which I had updated. This list was clear, easy to read and was extremely useful for driving interested parents and volunteers to the appropriate group websites. Moving this info to Scoutwiki is all well and good but most people attempting to find out about scouting are going to be using Wikipedia.
I was actually stunned to find out that the person who made all these changes doesn't even live in this hemisphere. How about people refrain from ruining useful recruitment tools for other people and stick to pages that relate to their own communities! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.236.68.211 ( talk) 21:53, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
In response to the IP editor, yes, I do live in Australia but I was involved in Scouting in the UK many years ago. But so what? WP is an international operation. I would add that there have been plenty of opportunities for UK editors to take a broad view of UK Scouting articles, but they have in recent times only edited stuff about their own back yard. This article has not had the list of Groups etc removed. They were never here. They were on individual County articles that were merged after a long discussion on the Scouting Project. As TimTay says they were just a directory. They were not properly sourced and changes, such as adding or deleting a Group were not sourced. WP is NOT intended to be a recruitment tool. I agree with TimTay about cutting the article down. It is disappointing that almost all activity on these region articles such as this one is about list of Gang Shows and the information on campsites. Where is the history, and the details of the impact of Scouting on the community? We are writing an encyclopedia. Please join us in that endeavor. -- Bduke (Discussion) 23:20, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
I find this article deeply unsatisfactory. The information for individual counties is split between various sections within the article, which makes it much harder for both readers interested in Scouting in a particular area, and for editors with information to add. The "official regions" of the UK are used by almost nobody except government, and are largely irrelevant for Scouting matters. I would suggest as a first step re-arranging this article into county-by-county subsections, which could then be the destinations of the various county redirects which currently have to point to the article as a whole. DuncanHill ( talk) 14:12, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
First, I did not say that we need to "report in the same way for different countries". I said we need to look at the wider question, if for no other reason than that all other members of the Scouting Project know what we are doing. However, we do need to treat all 9 articles about Scouting in England, along with the similar articles for Scotland, Wales and NI, in the same way. Second, I am well aware that "the governmental regions are virtually unknown to people in England". They are just a convenient way to break up the country as England would be too large. What would you suggest otherwise? Counties will not do. Scout counties do not always aline with government counties. Scout counties are just SA. As I mentioned, chapters of organisations have dificulty in justifying articles. There are also far too many. Anyway, I get the message that you do not like it. Before, we make any changes, you need to make clear what you think the purpose of the article is. The consensus was clear that it is not just about the Scout Association, although of course the bulk of the material will be about the SA. I think the lede and a history section should be general. I am sure that people in one county will be happy to learn about the history in nearby counties. I do not support splitting the history section into the county sections. If there is wider support to move the camp site and gang show material into the county sections, for all 12 articles, then of course I will support it. However I do not support doing it on just this one article. I am going to open up a new section at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scouting and point to it from the talk pages of all 12 region articles and maybe some other UK Scouting articles. Let us see what others think. -- Bduke (Discussion) 09:02, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
I have opened up a wider discussion on this topic at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scouting#Scouting in the regions of England, so please do not add to the discussion here. I will add a note to the talk pages of all the other 11 region articles, but it may take a while. -- Bduke (Discussion) 09:24, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
An IP editor has twice edited the lede to state that the second sentence only reads as "It is represented by the "Scout Association", making no reference to other Scouting organisations however minor. The situation is this. There is clear consensus that articles about a part of a country should not be about one organisation only. All other UK regional articles have a similar wording that mentions other organisations. For the first reason, these articles are not about Scouting in the Scout Association regions but about Scouting in the official government regions. However, I have no idea whether any Scout association other than the Scout Association is active in this region, although it seems likely that a few are. Even if none exist, there should be a mention of the possibility, but a change in wording might be appropriate. To the IP editor, I hope you now understand the situation, but if you still have concerns, please discuss them here. -- Bduke (Discussion) 07:21, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Scouting in South West England. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 03:19, 25 January 2016 (UTC)