Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting 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.
Describes the movement of Scouting: history (founding, growth), activities one does in Scouting, organization, should cover both male & mixed sections (Scouts and Cubs) and female only (Girl Guides and Brownies), younger/older sections, international
About the members, boys or girls aged 11-17 years, activities they do in Scouting, the Scout section, Troop/Patrol, Scout Law, Motto, Uniform. Not about history, not about the organization or movement.
General summary pages that have see also links to other Scouting pages. Used to avoid to lead users to more indepth articles, no longer disambiguation pages due to all the confusion of different naming conventions. All other plurals redirect to the singular per Wikipedia standard, not to Scouting or a separate organization oriented article
A new copy-paste detection bot is now in general use on English Wikipedia. Come check it out at the EranBot reporting page. This bot utilizes the Turnitin software (ithenticate), unlike User:CorenSearchBot that relies on a web search API from Yahoo. It checks individual edits rather than just new articles. Please take 15 seconds to visit the EranBot reporting page and check a few of the flagged concerns. Comments welcome regarding potential improvements. These likely copyright violations can be searched by WikiProject categories. Use "control-f" to jump to your area of interest (if such a copyvio is present).--Lucas559 (talk) 16:14, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Given the low level of activity, I think it is time to retire the project. Thoughts? --Gadget850talk 18:43, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
I agree that the activity is low, but the project allows a few of us to keep more in touch with Scouting articles than we might without it. I support keeping it, but it needs a little effort. Can the few of us that are still active put the project welcome on the user talk page of editors who edit a Scouting article as a fairly new wikipedian. I have been trying to do that, but I will try to be more active in doing it. It might attract some new members. --Bduke(Discussion) 22:54, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
The fact that the question was even asked shows a lack of vision-retirement was long overdue. Agree with BDuke, what we need is outreach. Scouting is still growing, we need to look at why we're not.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 12:10, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
Most Scouting subjects already have an article. What still can be written, are articles on important people in Scouting outside USA and England, smaller and / or historic National Scouting Organizations and important camp sites outside USA and England. But those can have a discussable notability. The nice articles have already been written, maintenance is a lot less fun. --EgelReaction? 07:57, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
Sure it's not as fun, watching vandal edits and seeing articles written 10 years ago with little activity (as is the case throughout Wikipedia now), but there are occasional gems still found, and we shouldn't throw up our hands and retire.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 15:35, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
I guess one thing we should think about is whether we need a project leader/coordinator/whatever. I do not know and I am not looking to do the job. --Bduke(Discussion) 21:20, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
I think a leader was necessary when we were in the booming growth stage, as we were working out what is notable or not, smoothing out disagreements and developing the Scouting WPMOS. I don't think we need someone to disseminate information from The Wikipowers That Be, or to get certain articles up to featured status or on the mainpage, I think we're all fairly adept at moving ourselves around. That being said, I miss Randy. Wikipedia eats its own, so I am also not looking to do the job.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 01:38, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
Way back when Randy was the leader, I had the job of asking the community whether we wanted him to continue. This continued with Ed for a while. I will therefore do something similar and take responsibility for closing this discussion around the end of this month. Let us have your views. Do we want a convenor or do we agree, as I am inclined to do at this point, with Kintetsubuffalo? --Bduke(Discussion) 05:57, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
I have nominated Eagle Scout (Boy Scouts of America) for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. DrKiernan (talk) 16:42, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi. On the internet sometimes we can find this quote, attributed to B.-P.:
It doesn't exists good or bad weather, but good or bad equipment
I looked for its source to check if it was real, but I couldn't find anything reliable. Do you have an idea of what it could be? Thank you very much :) --Superchilum(talk to me!) 10:06, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
I'm quite sure that this saying was not formulated by Baden-Powell. It exists in many languages and has a wide choice of differing wordings. Normally, it is suggested that the saying originated in some northern (cold/rainy/snowy) country, like Scotland, Norway or the Netherlands. --jergen (talk) 13:38, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
@Jergen: thank you, that's what I thought :) and what about a sentence which sounds like (I'm sorry, I only found it in Italian)
The only one who has never done anything wrong is who never did anything.