This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Merge: camps exist to serve the council and are rarely notable outside the context of the council. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 01:52, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Done --—— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 19:27, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
Copied from the former talk page, now buried on the redirect page. - OberRanks ( talk) 22:56, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
I remember very well that Goshen had a sailing camp that people could go to. I recall one of the counselors getting on a newly arrived bus and (in a VERY heavy British accent), stating "Are any of you blokes going to Olmstead Sailing Camp?? . Might be wroth mentioning (the Sailing Camp, not the guy. - OberRanks ( talk) 16:35, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
Ober, you are indeed correct, Goshen did feature Sail Camp. It was actually a part of Camp Olmstead. When I worked there in 1990, our sailmaster was from Holland. Me being a Sea Explorer Boatswain, I took a couple of opportunities to storm the beaches of our neighboring camps and claim them for Olmstead! Great memory, sir! Cheers! RobHoitt ( talk) 18:58, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
I was having login issues earlier, but I added what information I have so far about the USVI Council's now being a part of NCAC. I am unsure of districts, although I know USVI will have them, and I am unsure how the lodge is going to work. Sorry for not having all the data, but I'll try to update as I learn more. RobHoitt ( talk) 19:00, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
Goshen Scout Reservation does not appear notable on its own and I think it would be better to have it within the National Capital Area Council article. Deflagro Contribs/ Talk 21:58, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
Have to disagree with the does not appear designation. Abel ( talk) 00:13, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
Support Personally I think it should be merged. I know before he retired Gadget850 merged a lot of council pages with their scout camp pages. Almost every council has a scout camp. For the most part the scout camps are not distinct from the council itself except for things like the High Adventure Bases. I personally don't think the Scout Camp has enough notability separate from the council to warrant its own page. Marauder40 ( talk) 15:21, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
I've started a discussion to propose new (laxer) standards on Wikipedia Talk:WikiProject Scouting#Manual of Style: Standalone Camp Articles because of this discussion and a few other mergers I proposed. @ Id4abel: and @ Marauder40:, you two might be interested in commenting in that. Deflagro Contribs/ Talk 13:59, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
Request withdrawn Per discussion over at WP:SCOUT on Manual of Style updates for camps (prompted by this discussion and others), I'm going to withdraw my merger proposal on this article. While we are still hammering out the details for the updates, this article would still most meet the so-far agreed upon requirements of not being a stub. If there's any more discussions regarding sources, let's continue those outside of this merger section. Deflagro Contribs/ Talk 19:34, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
This article now suffers from major template/image clutter. I have tried twice to remove templates and maps from a camp that no longer exists to make it not so bad. Personally I feel most of the maps should disappear. As of right now there are 6 maps and templates for 3 short sections. Way to much overkill. Marauder40 ( talk) 17:54, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
I think the infoboxes would be okay if we could consolidate the maps. Instead of individual maps for each camp, how about one single map that had the camps on it? I changed the Infobox template from Infobox Campground to Infobox WorldScouting Camp so that it'll look more uniform with the rest of the article/other camp articles. I think that template is also a little more consolidated, but it kept all the same info. Deflagro Contribs/ Talk 14:14, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
@ Id4abel: Per WP:BRD, I made an edit, you reverted it, and I am now attempting to start discussion. Can you please explain to me why the same exact reference needs to be placed after each sentence in that paragraph, why a reference to a 152-page document is required to support "within the DC area," and why you returned the WP:SEAOFBLUE? Please read that paragraph very carefully, and compare it to what I had written. We are attempting to build an encyclopedia, but what you reverted to is very clunky and difficult to read. Citations are not required at the end of every sentence that contains new information; if all of the information is contained in a single source, then it only needs to be cited once. — Jkudlick • t • c • s 18:18, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
A third opinion has been requested. Since the above exchange is lengthy, can one of the two editors please state, in one or two sentences, what the question is? Robert McClenon ( talk) 17:25, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
3O Response: My opinion is that this edit by User:Id4abel is clearly making the article worse. In addition to introducing the erroneous duplicate of "Caroline county" (and breaking the alphabetization of the list), it took a simple paragraph and made it much more ponderous (all that repetition of "is located in", ugh!). It's also not necessary to separately footnote each store location. The one footnote at the end of the paragraph is obviously the source for all of it. (It's not like the location of Scout stores is a controversial statement requiring hyper-specific citation.)
So my opinion is that User:Jkudlick's version is superior. It conveys the same information, but "flows better", being both more concise and easier to read.
I also agree with the WP:SEAOFBLUE issue and that the removed wikilinks (to pamphlets and embroidered patch) were well-chosen as not necessary to link. 71.41.210.146 ( talk) 18:27, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
With the entire section Amangamek-Wipit Lodge #470 - Order of the Arrow copy and pasted ( 90% Copyvio Detector) from Lodge Operating Procedures, I rewrote the section.
Hi all I've notice, but did not remove, some dead links for the NCACBSA website since they have recently updated it and have redone most of the sitemap. So an example is the link to the district overview page is dead as there is not one that is currently available as a dedicated page (only as a drop down menu) on the new website. I'm not sure the procedure on links that are dead and don't have new link to replace it with. thanks for your help. BigMPerez ( talk) 05:36, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Merge: camps exist to serve the council and are rarely notable outside the context of the council. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 01:52, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Done --—— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 19:27, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
Copied from the former talk page, now buried on the redirect page. - OberRanks ( talk) 22:56, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
I remember very well that Goshen had a sailing camp that people could go to. I recall one of the counselors getting on a newly arrived bus and (in a VERY heavy British accent), stating "Are any of you blokes going to Olmstead Sailing Camp?? . Might be wroth mentioning (the Sailing Camp, not the guy. - OberRanks ( talk) 16:35, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
Ober, you are indeed correct, Goshen did feature Sail Camp. It was actually a part of Camp Olmstead. When I worked there in 1990, our sailmaster was from Holland. Me being a Sea Explorer Boatswain, I took a couple of opportunities to storm the beaches of our neighboring camps and claim them for Olmstead! Great memory, sir! Cheers! RobHoitt ( talk) 18:58, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
I was having login issues earlier, but I added what information I have so far about the USVI Council's now being a part of NCAC. I am unsure of districts, although I know USVI will have them, and I am unsure how the lodge is going to work. Sorry for not having all the data, but I'll try to update as I learn more. RobHoitt ( talk) 19:00, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
Goshen Scout Reservation does not appear notable on its own and I think it would be better to have it within the National Capital Area Council article. Deflagro Contribs/ Talk 21:58, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
Have to disagree with the does not appear designation. Abel ( talk) 00:13, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
Support Personally I think it should be merged. I know before he retired Gadget850 merged a lot of council pages with their scout camp pages. Almost every council has a scout camp. For the most part the scout camps are not distinct from the council itself except for things like the High Adventure Bases. I personally don't think the Scout Camp has enough notability separate from the council to warrant its own page. Marauder40 ( talk) 15:21, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
I've started a discussion to propose new (laxer) standards on Wikipedia Talk:WikiProject Scouting#Manual of Style: Standalone Camp Articles because of this discussion and a few other mergers I proposed. @ Id4abel: and @ Marauder40:, you two might be interested in commenting in that. Deflagro Contribs/ Talk 13:59, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
Request withdrawn Per discussion over at WP:SCOUT on Manual of Style updates for camps (prompted by this discussion and others), I'm going to withdraw my merger proposal on this article. While we are still hammering out the details for the updates, this article would still most meet the so-far agreed upon requirements of not being a stub. If there's any more discussions regarding sources, let's continue those outside of this merger section. Deflagro Contribs/ Talk 19:34, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
This article now suffers from major template/image clutter. I have tried twice to remove templates and maps from a camp that no longer exists to make it not so bad. Personally I feel most of the maps should disappear. As of right now there are 6 maps and templates for 3 short sections. Way to much overkill. Marauder40 ( talk) 17:54, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
I think the infoboxes would be okay if we could consolidate the maps. Instead of individual maps for each camp, how about one single map that had the camps on it? I changed the Infobox template from Infobox Campground to Infobox WorldScouting Camp so that it'll look more uniform with the rest of the article/other camp articles. I think that template is also a little more consolidated, but it kept all the same info. Deflagro Contribs/ Talk 14:14, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
@ Id4abel: Per WP:BRD, I made an edit, you reverted it, and I am now attempting to start discussion. Can you please explain to me why the same exact reference needs to be placed after each sentence in that paragraph, why a reference to a 152-page document is required to support "within the DC area," and why you returned the WP:SEAOFBLUE? Please read that paragraph very carefully, and compare it to what I had written. We are attempting to build an encyclopedia, but what you reverted to is very clunky and difficult to read. Citations are not required at the end of every sentence that contains new information; if all of the information is contained in a single source, then it only needs to be cited once. — Jkudlick • t • c • s 18:18, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
A third opinion has been requested. Since the above exchange is lengthy, can one of the two editors please state, in one or two sentences, what the question is? Robert McClenon ( talk) 17:25, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
3O Response: My opinion is that this edit by User:Id4abel is clearly making the article worse. In addition to introducing the erroneous duplicate of "Caroline county" (and breaking the alphabetization of the list), it took a simple paragraph and made it much more ponderous (all that repetition of "is located in", ugh!). It's also not necessary to separately footnote each store location. The one footnote at the end of the paragraph is obviously the source for all of it. (It's not like the location of Scout stores is a controversial statement requiring hyper-specific citation.)
So my opinion is that User:Jkudlick's version is superior. It conveys the same information, but "flows better", being both more concise and easier to read.
I also agree with the WP:SEAOFBLUE issue and that the removed wikilinks (to pamphlets and embroidered patch) were well-chosen as not necessary to link. 71.41.210.146 ( talk) 18:27, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
With the entire section Amangamek-Wipit Lodge #470 - Order of the Arrow copy and pasted ( 90% Copyvio Detector) from Lodge Operating Procedures, I rewrote the section.
Hi all I've notice, but did not remove, some dead links for the NCACBSA website since they have recently updated it and have redone most of the sitemap. So an example is the link to the district overview page is dead as there is not one that is currently available as a dedicated page (only as a drop down menu) on the new website. I'm not sure the procedure on links that are dead and don't have new link to replace it with. thanks for your help. BigMPerez ( talk) 05:36, 19 August 2020 (UTC)