User talk:HawkeSeaScouts

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, HawkeSeaScouts, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!

It is great to see you are editing articles on Scouting. If you not already seen it, may I draw your attention to the Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting. Your articles have already been discussed on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scouting#Sea Scouts New Zealand. I am afraid Ed is right. Sea Scouts New Zealand could be OK, but it needs more than a list of Groups. Indeed that list really should go as I am sure there is a list on an external link. Hawke Sea Scouts is different. There is a clear consensus that individual Groups are not notable. This is discussed on the Scouting Project pages and fits with the general consensus that articles on individual chapters of organisations are not allowed. Normally such articles are merged into articles on Scouting in States, Counties or Provinces. Unfortunately we do not have such articles for New Zealand. Maybe you could write them. See what we have in Australia and UK, although I must say many of the UK County articles are little more than lists of Groups. --Bduke 00:28, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I have proposed the merge of Hawke Sea Scouts to Sea Scouts New Zealand, two article that you started. Please see the discussion on Talk:Sea Scouts New Zealand and add your comments. --Bduke 02:58, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

I have now had a good look at the Scouting WikiProject and in particular Editing conventions and now see why you are making the suggestion - The problem with the guideline on Local Scouting Articles (BSA) is that, as indicated by its title, it reflects the american model where you may well find articles about the councils which could include details about units. This is very unlikely to happen in NZ. So I would again ask that you consider a slightly different model in order to increase the visibility of scouting in general. HawkeSeaScouts (talk) 06:36, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi Craig, I am going to reply here to your comments on my talk page as you have copied the main one I want to reply to above. First. I do not think your comments were that blunt. As a Yorkshire man I can be much blunter! :-) The problem is not really with the Scouting WikiProject guideline on Local Scouting Articles. The problem is with this dot point:-

  • Individual chapters of national and international organizations are usually not notable enough to warrant a separate article unless sufficient notability is established through reliable sources. However, chapter information may be included in list articles as long as only verifiable information is included.

in Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) which the project guidelines reflects and explains in the Scouting context. Maybe the oldest Sea Scout Group in New Zealand might meet that, but a whole lot of articles, as you suggest, will certainly not. Indeed I am surprised that the Hawke Bay article has not been proposed for deletion already. It is pretty clear that it will not survive long. While Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Local Scouting articles (BSA) is about USA, there is a clear consensus to do something similar to articles from other countries. Indeed I thought we had something more general and international than that and I will look further. Many articles on Groups in the UK, Australia, Singapore and other places have been merged. If you look at the list of proposed merges at Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Article watchlist, you will see just below the Hawke Bay entry, two UK Groups articles that have been merged recently. The other problem is getting reliable independent sources. Your link to this site simply does not meet Wikipedia policy. Certainly, the general Sea Scout article is OK, or at least it will be if you add content other than the list of Groups. How is scouting organised below national level in NZ. In Australia it is the States and Territories and we have articles on Scouting in all of them. In UK it is Counties (England) and Scout Areas (Scotland, Wales and NI). Are there Scout structures for places like Otago? I will copy the main parts of this to the merge discussion. Feel free to discuss this further with me on my talk page, or here (it is on my watch list) or by e-mail (I have e-mail set up and there is a link to the left of my user page). Regards, Brian. --Bduke (talk) 08:05, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi, hope you have had a good Christmas. I have copied your articles to ScoutWiki. I think that is the place for group articles. Most of their articles are copies from Wikipedia but they say Group articles are welcome. Happy New Year. --Bduke (talk) 03:27, 28 December 2007 (UTC)