Category talk:Local councils of the Boy Scouts of America

rating

Are we rating category pages? --evrik 14:00, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Alphabetizing

I just spent the morning adding the state names onto the different "Scouting in ..." pages. evrik 16:53, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

deuglifying the page

having that photo, unwrapped, top center on the page is both unsightly and unwiki. Sorry, brother, it just is. Chris 23:44, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

• Funny you say that, because your edit is even worse! --evrik 17:07, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

There is no need to get ugly yourself. This is a category, not an article, there is no need for a graphic, this is a repository for articles that are grouped together, which is what people are looking for when they come there. If you insist on dumping your photos of that statue all about the Wikipedia, at least wikify them according to Wikipedia style. Putting it large top-and-center is not according to that. Chris 01:24, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

• What's ugly is your limited vision of what a page is supposed to look like. Show me the style article that says what a category page has to look like. --evrik 13:56, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
• Oh, and while you might like to categorize the image as spam. It IS the original Ideal Scout Statue in front of one of the oldest council buildings. --evrik 13:59, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

What makes it spam is that you put it all over the Wikipedia, not the object of the photo itself. Unwikified, it both jams what the reader is looking for farther down and makes them think "gee, I've seen that statue 8 million times now." You are starting to get rude. I am not attacking you personally. I am leaving the above on here, and am clipping the first paragraph of Wikipedia:Civility-"Civility is a rule for the conduct of edits, comments, and talk page discussions on all Wikipedias. Whereas incivility is roughly defined as personally targeted behavior that causes an atmosphere of greater conflict and stress, our rule of civility states plainly that people must act with civility toward one another." I have no problem with the photo if it is properly Wikified. If it is not, I will keep pulling it off. Chris 23:43, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

And as per Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scouting, I'm not the only one who shares this view. Chris 23:45, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Scout photo spamming

In "Category:Boy Scouts of America Local Councils" I have now entirely removed the unnecessary graphic, as it is a category, not an article, and dumping photos of that statue by User:evrik all over Scouting articles and categories alike is becoming spam. If he insists on spamming those photos all about the Wikipedia, they need at least to be Wikified, which means to one side or the other so the text will wrap around it. I say that in a category, there is no need for a graphic, it is a repository for articles that are grouped together. I would like the thoughts of others on this. That user makes many good contributions, but that isn't one of them. Chris 01:47, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

• Evrik has made a nice picture, which can well be used. Indeed it should not be in category pages. As it currently is only in one article (as far as I can see), I support your recommendation that it there be better wikified (text aligment, caption). I don't see the picture spamming at present. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 10:22, 30 June 2006 (UTC).
  • The image is currently only in the BSA article (see list on image page). I agree photos shouldn't be in the cat page itself. Rlevse 10:26, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Kintetsubuffalo, you need to take a chill pill. I think you are violating Wikipedia:Civility, Wikipedia:Assume good faith, and at least the third, fourth, fifth and sixth points of the ScoutLaw.

I dislike people that use hyperbole and bend the truth to try and get what they want. The image Image:Philly_Scout.png has been used in one article and one category. So your characterization that I am somehow spamming is a mischaracterization. You also falsely accused me of a wp:3RR violation.

There is no wikipedia style document that says how a category should, or should not look. If there is, please show it to me. There is also no article for Boy Scouts of America Local Councils, so trying to dress up the category is, I feel, an appropriate thing to do. Since you have now tried to drag the rest of this community into what was a difference of opinion on style, I will abide by the decision of the majority. --evrik 17:21, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

If you replace a link to an article that has already been merged, and a photo that has already been Wikified and/or removed three times, that's 3RR. Wikify it or leave it off, or I will keep cleaning up your messes.

That is not the only place that statue appears. I don't care what sort of people rude people dislike, we're not here for that. We're here to make dignified and encyclopedic Scouting articles. Chris 17:21, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Brothers in Scouting, STOP PLEASE. Aside from the Wiki rules on WP:AGF and WP:Civility, this has gotten very un-Scoutlike. Please keep it civil and Scout-like. We have enough trouble fighting off non-Scouters who want to change our articles and cats to suit their own purposes (a la the BP article stuff on his alleged homosexuality that is going on right now -- for the second time). Please let's try to cooperate amongst ourselves and if you must release pent-up Wiki frustrations, try to release them in a way that protects and improves the Scouting project and its members. Yours in Scouting, Randy, Rlevse 21:38, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

PS: I see no reason to put photos on a cat page. Rlevse 21:41, 4 July 2006 (UTC)