Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scouting/Philmont Scout Ranch task force

List of camps

Are the individual camp articles being deleted? The names on the list have been unlinked and it seems like the information is going to be merged into that article. Umm, I guess that's okay but it seems like we won't be needing the infobox I made (oh well, at least it was a learning experiance).--L1AM 06:30, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

On the contrary, the camps all seem to have been kept. I think there's quite enough information about each to justify an article; the list can probably be scrapped, and the linked list returned to the main Philmont article. — Dan | talk 04:14, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

I disagree. Especially with trail camps, I don't think there is enough to justify an article. Staff camps, on the other hand, could possibly get their own page. But trail camps should just be described in the list. And on that note, there should be some organized way of presenting that information. Zybthranger 01:33, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

PhilWiki

Would it be possible to host a Philwiki somewhere? It seems like it could be a very effective, dynamic guide for staffers and potential hikers. So many websites that are incomplete, or opinionated, while forums are nightmares. Likewise, Philmanac has errors and has to be reprinted with each update. Meanwhile, so much information about Philmont is inappropriate for Wikipedia.

Alternatively, We could start one on WikiCities. Getting editors for the project should not be hard, with so many fan groups in existence. Getting the basic material is not too hard - there are sources available, while Philmont's records are also usable. Beside this the administrative elements of PhilWiki could all be taken from Wikipedia, to limit the amount of work needed to complete this.

We could invite all the administrators of Philmont, as well as contacting the people at PSA and other people like living descendants of the Abreus, etc.

Terms and specific issues and problems - of which there will be many - could be hashed out at a later date. Donbas 17:29, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

As creator of this WikiProject, I strongly endorse this proposal. I'm willing to help you set it up - just email me whenever. Great idea! --L1AM 12:09, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

While not a member of this WikiProject, I think that having a seperate Wiki site for Philmont would be a great idea, as it would place less need for "notability" of small facts and realistically allow individual pages for each campsite that otherwise wouldn't "make the cut" so to speak in regular wikipedia. Radagast83 08:14, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

A Philmont wiki has been established (by Donbas) at Wikicities. It can be found at philmont.wikicities.com. Your contributions would be appreciated. Hope to see you all there! --L1AM (talk - 'tribs.) 10:01, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Project Directory

Hello. The WikiProject Council is currently in the process of developing a master directory of the existing WikiProjects to replace and update the existing Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. These WikiProjects are of vital importance in helping wikipedia achieve its goal of becoming truly encyclopedic. Please review the following pages:

• User:Badbilltucker/Culture Directory,
• User:Badbilltucker/Culture Directory 2,
• User:Badbilltucker/Philosophy and religion Directory,
• User:Badbilltucker/Sports Directory,
• User:Badbilltucker/Geographical Directory,
• User:Badbilltucker/Geographical Directory/United States, (note: This page will be retitled to more accurately reflect its contents)
• User:Badbilltucker/History and society directory, and
• User:Badbilltucker/Science directory

and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope to have the existing directory replaced by the updated and corrected version of the directory above by November 1. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 22:46, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry if you tried to update it before, and the corrections were gone. I have now moved the new draft in the old directory pages, so the links should work better. My apologies for any confusion this may have caused you. B2T2 14:44, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia Day Awards

Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 22:55, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

ScoutingWikiProject merge

The Philmont Scout Ranch WikiProject was merged with the ScoutingWikiProject, as a task force thereof, by unanimous vote on 7 Aug 2007 (EDT).Rlevse 01:50, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Tobasco Donkeys up for deletion

The Tobasco Donkeys' article has been nominated for deletion here (interestingly at the same time I'm waiting to get their new CD). Looking at WP:BAND, I think it may meet #7:Has become the most prominent representative of a notable style or of the local scene of a city, in that it is very representative of the staff bands at Philmont. Although the problem still remains of more sources - make that any sources. Zybthranger (talk) 19:29, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Result was deletion:

The result was Delete. A number of nominators commented that the ensemble passes WP:BAND, but there are no reliable sources whatsoever quoted in the article to prove this. To take the WP:BAND criteria in turn; they clearly don't pass 2,3,5,6,8,9,10,11 or 12. As for the remaining criteria (1, 4 or 7), they may pass any of these; but this would require third-party citations. There aren't any, therefore, reluctantly, the only option is deletion.

(I don't see them meeting 4 though) Also, copied to http://philmont.wikia.com/wiki/The_Tobasco_Donkeys. Zybthranger (talk) 02:52, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

• FYI

Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2008 May 12#The Tobasco Donkeys --evrik ^(talk) 19:55, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Interesting. I don't see it being changed. Nobody has any valid sources on them at the moment, which is unfortunate because it's been decided that the sources needed to be added within one week of the deletion nomination. My opinion on the subject is that both arguments, for and against deletion, were perfectly valid, but once it was put on the track for deletion, it would end up getting deleted. Zybthranger (talk) 20:59, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Sources

What are some good sources for the Philmont articles? I'm at the ranch now (2nd year Ranger) and sometime I think I'll head over to the trading post or Seton to get some books that would be helpful for this. My biggest worry is self published sources. I haven't checked out many of the books, but I think many of them would fall under this category. Zybthranger (talk) 21:24, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Have to see some titles to understand if they are self published. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 22:21, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

UTM Coordinates

Question. How do I list coordinates as UTM? From the list of camps article, I can see that lat/long is done like 36°30′11″N 105°03′34″W. However, all the coordinates at Philmont are done in UTM, so I think it should be changed over to that. Also, I should be able to add UTM coordinates for all of the camps (I plan on cleaning up this page so it looks nicer when I have the time). Zybthranger (talk) 15:09, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Answered at Talk:Philmont Scout Ranch camps‎. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 22:19, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

join?

I was out there this summer and I am willing to help. How do you join this. --Guerillero (talk) 01:43, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Philmont Ranger

Is this task force still active? I have proposed that Philmont Ranger be merged into the main Philmont article --Bduke (Discussion) 20:58, 13 December 2010 (UTC).

Geographic features of Philmont Scout Ranch

Thoughts on combining the following pages - Baldy, Mt Phillips, the Tooth, and Urraca into a single 'Geographic features of Philmont' article? A section on Trail Peak and the plane crash as well. Kind of like the Philmont Scout Ranch camps page, with sections on the various peaks, mesas, and other features on the ranch. The small individual articles seem silly because I highly doubt they'll get expanded. If they do expand, they can be broken off at that point. Zybthranger (talk) 15:22, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

I concur. These articles have had only minor/maintenance edits in quite a while. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 17:02, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

A quick search for naming conventions didn't turn up any similar 'Geographic features of name' articles, and while 'Geography of name ' and ' name geography' page names exist, almost all redirect to geography sections of the ' name ' page. Now I'm planning on rewriting Location and geography to include all the info rather than create Geography of Philmont. I think I have some books detailing the geological history of the ranch, otherwise I'm going to put this on hold until I get ahold of such books. Zybthranger ^talk 18:28, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Moved discussion to the PSR talk page. ZybthRanger ^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:18, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Rayado Program subsection and Rayado Program

The Rayado Program subsection of Philmont Scout Ranch is much better than the Rayado Program page. I just went through to see that all info in Rayado Program is covered in Rayado Program subsection. Also, the external links on Rayado Program are both dead. I think that keeping Rayado as a subsection as opposed to an individual page is the best plan. Zybthranger ^talk 18:44, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Moved discussion to the PSR talk page. ZybthRanger ^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:18, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Hidden task force :-)

I've been somewhat active editing the main PSR page for 10 months and didn't even know that the PSR taskforce page existed. There is no indication of it in the articles. Recommend taking it out of hiding and putting a header note on the relevant pages. North8000 (talk) 15:46, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Side comment: I did meant the PSR Taskforce page in the comments. I started discussing the a merge possibility there about a week starting an official merge discussion on the individual pages and the PSR page.

On the article talk pages, there is a byline about the taskforce in the WikiProject Scouting banner. ZybthRanger ^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:33, 26 February 2012 (UTC)