Talk:Boy Scouts (Boy Scouts of America)/Archive 1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
History
The section on "Establishment" is just a copy of the organization history of the BSA, and I think should be removed and left in the main BSA article. This article should focus ONLY on the Boy Scout program and its history. --Emb021 21:39, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- We need to do more work here! The Improved Scout Program did NOT last until 1989. It was mainly dropped in the late 70s when Green Bar Bill came back and rolled out the "All Out For Scouting" program and they rolled out the new GBB written 8th (?) edition of the BSHB. The last vestiges of it was gotten rid of in 1989, when they dropped skill awards. Also "In 1996, the Varsity Scouts program was separated from the troop program." makes no sense. Varsity Scouts was created in 1984! --Emb021 22:53, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Fixed the dates for ISP. --Gadget850 ( Ed)
-
-
-
- Looking at your site: [1] and [2]. This gets confusing, I read this a few times, and if I understand correctly:
- 1984-present: Varsity Scout teams as a separate program.
- 1989-1995: Varsity teams as a troop program.
- Is this correct? --Gadget850 ( Ed) 16:21, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- Yes. Once again we can thank BSA National for creating programs with too similiar names (can you say "Venture" and "Venturing")? Keep this in mind. The Varsity Scout Program came first in 1984. I guess 'inspired' by the 'success' of this program, as well as the many countries having 'Venture Scouts' or the like, National decided to get rid of the Leadership Corps in 1989 with the Venture/Varsity in-troop program (not to be confused with Varsity Scouts, Venturing, etc). Venture Crews would do high adventure stuff, Varsity Teams (again, not to be confused with Varsity Scout Teams. Am I sounding like a stuck record??) would do sports stuff. It took National about 5-6 years to realize their mistake and drop the Varsity term for the in-troop program. (the Varsity strip would then move to the Varsity Scout Team). After that point, the Venture Crews could do either high adventure or sports stuff. Read my site, I pretty much cover it all. --Emb021 03:21, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
- Looking at your site: [1] and [2]. This gets confusing, I read this a few times, and if I understand correctly:
-
-
- Ok, I did some cleanup and corrections. Please stop removing information. And please re-read what is there. Some are editing and putting in redundant info, making unclear sentences, and removing useful info. --Emb021 19:02, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
'Thinking out loud here'. As I noted, I fealt the history section in this article should focus only on the history of the Boy Scout program instead of the over BSA. Some of the things I fealt this might touch on is things like:
- early military style uniforms, and how early BSA Boy Scout program didn't quite conform to B-P's vision. (SM appointing PL, etc)
- changes to Boy Scout program caused by Green Bar Bill that brought it more in-line with B-P's vision. boy run troops, etc.
- allowance of senior boy patrols within troops (sea Scouts, explorer scouts, etc), but not get too much that should be covered in those articles.
- use of Explorer Crews in a troop during the 50s.
- See below.
- National Good Turns? or should that be in BSA main.
- BSA main. I'll start a section. --Gadget850 ( Ed)
- Scouts to arctic/antarctic with Byrd and later? or in own article?
- Perhaps a section in List of notable Scouts? --Gadget850 ( Ed)
--Emb021 22:13, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
Sounds good. I have been focusing on the 70s since that is the era when I was a Scout and I have a lot of material at hand. The senior programs are probably the most confusing part of the BSA program as they have changed so much over the years. I think we should note the Explorer crew within the troop, with links to the Exploring (Boy Scouts of America) article. Good Turns should be in the main article, as they cover all the divisions. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 12:11, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
- Perhaps an overview of the senior programs within the troop would be good. Those outside the troop would go under Exploring or a similar article. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 16:21, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- Well, that's how I looked at it. Don't spent space explaning these program here, but explain they were allowed to be used within the troop at certain times (this is all covered at my website). One thing I've debated was whether or not to cover the Leadership Corps here or in a separate page. Are the changes in JL training worth covering or just pointing to the Pine Tree website, etc. --Emb021 03:09, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
There is just too much on the Senior Scout program. We should lightly cover some of this in the Boy Scouts and Exploring article, but put the bulk of it in an article such as History of the Senior Scout programs of the Boy Scouts of America. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 22:02, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
Merge: ranks
Propose that the ranks of Scout through Life be merged into this article. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 15:06, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- Do you mean get rid of the separate Scout-Life articles? Since the BSA article has been split, I am okay with that, but I'd leave the Adv & Recognition article intact. Rlevse 15:09, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- Yes. Much of the information has already been included in the Boy Scout article. It's mostly history stuff that needs to be moved. I also recommend that we leave Eagle separate as it is rather large for a section. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 15:30, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Make a sub page link to it from here.Rlevse 16:53, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- Done --Gadget850 ( Ed) 19:34, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- I'd leave the current requirements out, that'd make it too long and require too much updating. Rlevse 12:49, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Yes: a thumbnail of requirements, and a footnote for details. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 13:56, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
-
Done. Merged Scout through Star. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 21:02, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
Merge: Venture
Propose that Venture (Boy Scouts of America) be merged into this article. Venture is a direct boy scout program, and most of the article consists of history. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 15:41, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- Agree, be sure to keep Venture patrol distinguished from Venture crew. Explaining the differnce would help as many people don't realize it. Rlevse 16:48, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- Done. BTW, did you know that this is the third use of crew? --Gadget850 ( Ed) 19:44, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- Because a venture crew is a separate entity from a troop but a venture patrol is a specialized patrol that is still a part of a troop, so yes, there is a distinct difference that needs to be noted; it is not just a rename of a venture crew. Rlevse 22:53, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
-
- Sorry, but you are totally incorrect! A venture crew was NEVER a separate entity from a troop! It was ALWAYS part of a troop. The only way a 'separate entity' could exist is if they were another unit. A venture patrol was just a renaming of the venture crew! I know, we had a venture crew when the program was rolled out. I have all the literature from that time, so I don't know the basis for your information. I've been researching this area for years. See my website. --Emb021 23:02, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- Actually, there have been more then three uses of the term 'crew' in the BSA. It was first used by Sea Scouts as their equivalent to a patrol. Rover Scouts units were be called 'Crews'. Later the term was picked up by Explorer Scouts & Senior Scout units (Posts & Outfits, respectiviely) as their name for their equivalent to patrols. The equivalent to an SPL was called 'Senior Crew Leader'. The term 'crew' was supposed to be standard across all Senior units, but Air Scouts/Explorers still used the term 'Flight'. This is also why Philmont has 'crews': they were usually groups of senior scouts. Later, when Exploring was revamped, only Sea Explorers still used it. This is what lead them to call venture groups 'crews', and later Venturing units 'Crews'. I count 7 uses. --Emb021 23:07, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
I think there is a bit of terminology here: We currently have Venturing crews, a separate division. Venture crews are now Venture patrols and were always part of the troop. I wish BSA had used a completely different name for the two. This is confusing, and it's not the first time it's happened. I'm gonna have to ask Doc Miller why they did that the next time I see him. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 00:17, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
- Good point, I always say Venture Crew when I mean the separate unit and Venture patrol when I mean the patrol that is part of a troop, but I guess I should say VenturING Crew. Rlevse 02:04, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
- And its incorrect and causes confusion. Ignore the terms 'crew' and 'patrol'. Focus on the program names: "Venture" and "Venturing". "Venture" is a program for older Boy Scouts. "Venturing" is a co-ed program for older youth. Agree on the points Gadget850 has pointed out. I (and many other scouters) have spent the last 9 years making sure our fellow scouters don't confuse the 2 programs. (its one of a handful of 'hot button' topics with me) I didn't like the idea that they were going to use a term too similiar to an existing program (Venture came out in 1989, Venturing in 1998). I also didn't like them using the 'crew' for the unit name, and wished they had brought back 'Outfit'. Regardless of Rovers, 'crew' has always to mean indicated a patrol-like subgroup of a unit (Crews in Explorer Posts & Sea Scout Ships, crews at Philmont, venture crew in troops). I heard that the National Venturing Committee had voted to get rid of the Venture Patrols (as if they have that power). I should have asked Doc Miller that when I met him at Sea Base in January. --Emb021 16:27, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
- You can't just ignore "crew" and "patrol", because that's what they are and are called, even in official BSA literature, towit: [3]. And whether anyone of us like it or not "Venture Crew" is used all over the country in common everyday usage when referring to a separate Venturing unit, as are "crew" and "patrol"; as is "Venturer" when referring to someone in a Venturing Crew. Yes, it's all confusing and largely caused by national, but that's what BSA named them (Venturing Crew and Venture Patrol) and ignoring the fact "crew" refers to a separate unit and "patrol" to a part of a troop will not make it go away. Rlevse 16:43, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
- You misunderstood the point I was trying to make. I was trying to get you to focus on the names of the programs, and not the unit terms. The Programs are "Venture" and "Venturing". Regardless of how widely used the term "Venture Crew" is used, it is an incorrect term! Please do not lecture me on Venturing. I have been involved with the program for day one. I am fully aware of the correct terms ("Venturer", "Venturing Crew", "Venture Patrol", etc). I maintain a large site cover the history of these programs and contributed to many of these articles here at wikipedia. --Emb021 18:51, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
- Why stop? You're the one lecturing me and getting all excited, putting exclamation points in and such. Calm down and discuss rationally. I know you have contributed to Wiki extensively, but so have I, so what's the point of that statement? Whether you agree or not, it's correct or not, people won't stop saying "Venture Crew" in everyday use, though I do agree we need to use the proper terms in the Wiki articles. Rlevse 19:16, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
- You misunderstood the point I was trying to make. I was trying to get you to focus on the names of the programs, and not the unit terms. The Programs are "Venture" and "Venturing". Regardless of how widely used the term "Venture Crew" is used, it is an incorrect term! Please do not lecture me on Venturing. I have been involved with the program for day one. I am fully aware of the correct terms ("Venturer", "Venturing Crew", "Venture Patrol", etc). I maintain a large site cover the history of these programs and contributed to many of these articles here at wikipedia. --Emb021 18:51, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
- You can't just ignore "crew" and "patrol", because that's what they are and are called, even in official BSA literature, towit: [3]. And whether anyone of us like it or not "Venture Crew" is used all over the country in common everyday usage when referring to a separate Venturing unit, as are "crew" and "patrol"; as is "Venturer" when referring to someone in a Venturing Crew. Yes, it's all confusing and largely caused by national, but that's what BSA named them (Venturing Crew and Venture Patrol) and ignoring the fact "crew" refers to a separate unit and "patrol" to a part of a troop will not make it go away. Rlevse 16:43, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
- And its incorrect and causes confusion. Ignore the terms 'crew' and 'patrol'. Focus on the program names: "Venture" and "Venturing". "Venture" is a program for older Boy Scouts. "Venturing" is a co-ed program for older youth. Agree on the points Gadget850 has pointed out. I (and many other scouters) have spent the last 9 years making sure our fellow scouters don't confuse the 2 programs. (its one of a handful of 'hot button' topics with me) I didn't like the idea that they were going to use a term too similiar to an existing program (Venture came out in 1989, Venturing in 1998). I also didn't like them using the 'crew' for the unit name, and wished they had brought back 'Outfit'. Regardless of Rovers, 'crew' has always to mean indicated a patrol-like subgroup of a unit (Crews in Explorer Posts & Sea Scout Ships, crews at Philmont, venture crew in troops). I heard that the National Venturing Committee had voted to get rid of the Venture Patrols (as if they have that power). I should have asked Doc Miller that when I met him at Sea Base in January. --Emb021 16:27, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
Please take a time out on this. I'm not sure how this started, but let us all reason together and come back to it later. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 19:51, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
OK: Can we get back to the issue of a merge? After a week, we have two for it (Rlevse and myself) by my count, and none against. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 19:03, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
merge complete --Gadget850 ( Ed) 14:24, 28 March 2006 (UTC)