Talk:World Organization of the Scout Movement

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Discrimination against "Infidels" and Bisexual/Gay people:

See Talk:Girl Scouts of the USA#Discrimination against "Infidels" and Bisexual/Gay people:. --Mistress Selina Kyle 19:27, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

What is your point by posting this link here? Do you have a suggestion for this article? --jergen 19:08, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
I have to agree with the previous poster. The link is not applicable to the WOSM article, since this is NOT a WOSM sanctioned way of running a Scout association. It is, however, highly applicable to the BSA article. --Johan.holmberg@home.se 01:13, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Role of Scouting at the United Nations

Jergen had a problem with this text.

  • The WOSM is the non-governmental organization (NGO), that represents the Scouting movement at the United Nations.

Discussion of the WOSM role at the United Nations is relevant and appropriate on this page. evrik 16:24, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

    • That was the problem? Ablaze 16:39, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
      • There was a comment on another page that the information was not well enough documented.evrik 16:46, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Chief scout

In Template:Infobox WorldScouting there is a field called "Chief Scout". While it is described as the "name of president or equivalent (optional)" (which in WOSM's case should be the Secretary General, as the chairman of the committee is given no powers by WOSM's constitutions .

Anyway, there only ever was one Chief Scout of the world, and it was B.-P., so I'd rather mention him in that box, and I'm sure Eduardo Missoni will forgive me ;-)

--Lou Crazy 23:00, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

There is no "chairman of WOSM", just a Chairman of the committee with no real powers outside the committee.. --Lou Crazy 03:48, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

The field in the infobox is intended to list the president of the organization. Both Herman Hui as chairman of the executive board and Eduardo Missoni as the Secretary General could be listed. Now they are listed both. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 19:22, 8 October 2006 (UTC).

The executive power of WOSM rests in the whole committee, not in its chairman. So you'd have to list the whole committee. --Lou Crazy 23:05, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
I think the point is solved by adjusting the field as done (and equiv. added), and by listing both Missoni and Hui (as done). I'm not going into semantics on chairman nor into the political power of members of the World Scout Committee. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 23:16, 8 October 2006 (UTC).
By claiming Hui is the chairman of WOSM you are going into semantics :-) --Lou Crazy 23:30, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Reverting spamming

I am once again reverting the POV addition by User:Jagz, he's already spammed it enough. It would be comparable to someone suing Coca-Cola and having to plaster one's article over articles having to do with all soft drinks or Atlanta. Checking out the guy's edit record, he definitely has an agenda. It's not censorship, it's having your article linked only on proper articles. Will continue to revert each time this comes up. Chris 02:13, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

You won the debate because you don't make any sense. I'm speechless. --Jagz 02:49, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Scouting Controversies and Concerns article needs expansion

The Scouting controversies and concerns article needs to be expanded by the addition of Scouting problems and controversies from countries and regions around the world. --Jagz 03:08, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Merge

Suggest merge of World Scout Bureau, World Scout Committee and World Scout Conference. These articles are not written as expansions of the sections in this article, so there is a lot of overlap. World Scout Bureau and World Scout Committee seem to have their content copied from a BSA and a WOSM site; see their talk pages for details. If they can then be expanded here, then they can be split back into separate articles. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 18:45, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

support merge. Chris 13:32, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
support merge. J.D. 13:32, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

International organization leaders by year

I found this article/category, and would like to start filling in for WOSM and WAGGGS. Do you guys know where I can get a list of past Secretaries General of the World Organization of the Scout Movement? (as well as a more complete list for Director/Chief Executive of WAGGGS) We need to start filling in some of those missing teeth. Also, for bios like Missoni, we need a {{succession box}}, especially as we may soon have a new Secretary General because of the BSA letter. Chris 22:33, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

I added a succession box using {{s-start}} and {{s-npo|wosm}}. The WSC removed Missoni yesterday, but he is still incumbent until the end of the month. -- Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 23:07, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

WSC meeting

The WSC met in Geneva at the end of February— major discussions were governance review and proposed amendments to the WOSM constitution . -- Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 11:11, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

The image Image:Srtw1977.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --07:16, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

flags

On the WOSM article, I have concerns about the flags, but I don't know legalese well enough, do they violate http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(icons)#Flags or are they okay? Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 22:11, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Exaggerated claims of "membership"

The article claims the WOSM has 31 million members. There is no reference for this claim. The constitution of the WOSM makes no provision for such membership. It is highly dubious that 31 million people have voluntarily entered into membership of this (or any) organization. Nation states have the capacity to appropriate people under their jurisdiction as citizens but private organizations such as the WOSM can't just make claims over large numbers of people around the world. On the same basis I could write a constitution claiming the whole world's population as members. It might look impressive but would be of little effect. The WOSM's membership could be composed of the members of the World Scout Conference or the members of the World Scout Committee or just the World Scout Bureau. In what way are the claimed 31 million members constitutionally and legally members with legal obligations to the organization and the organization having legal obligations to those members? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.171.85.81 (talk) 11:54, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

I added a reference for membership. I really don't know where the rest of this is going, but you can read the WOSM constitution. --  Gadget850 talk 17:48, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

"The rest of this" is a challenge to the preposterous claim that the WOSM has 31 or 36 million members. The so called "members" are not members at all. Quote from the WOSM constitution:

"Membership of the World Organization is open to all National Scout Organizations which fulfil the requirements for membership."

WOSM has just 161 members!

Hey, who remembers the 1980s, 30 odd years ago? Well that's when some of those WOSM "As at 31st December 2012" membership figures are from. Quality reference for facts Gadget850. Which is more inflated and rubbery, the WOSM figures or your Gadget? 127.0.0.1 (talk) 15:34, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Sorry- can't help you. Bye. --  Gadget850 talk 18:15, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Edit warring by IP troll

I'm assuming the same IP troll is the one presently editwarring over the article. I will continue to revert all IP changes that look similar.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 13:20, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

From another perspective it is you, Kintetsubuffalo, who is carrying on edit warring. Please check changes before reverting, edit specifics where you feel it is reasonable and challenge with citation needed tags but don't just revert and discard everything including the good and referenced parts. Much of the edit was just re-arrangement. Useful links, including for navigation within the page, to references and to other Wikipedia pages were added. Your wholesale reversion leaves the article on the WOSM without a reference and link to the WOSM constitution. The substantive changes related to the foundation date of 1920 and members of the WOSM. The changes provided a link to the Wikipedia page on WOSM membership which supported the changes and a referenced link to the WOSM constitution which supported the changes. Yet you justified your wholesale reversion by claiming the changes were "uncited".101.170.85.82 (talk) 16:00, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Incorrect foundation date

The article gives an incorrect foundation date of 1920 in the Infobox and first paragraph. This is inconsistent with the detailed information given in the History section which indicates the WOSM was formed in 1922 as the WAISM.

The "First International Scout Conference" in 1920 was not a WOSM conference as it occurred before the WOSM was formed. The Boy Scout International Bureau was funded (mainly by generous BSA supporters) to form an international scout organization. Mortimer L. Schiff of the BSA was the main architect of the first WOSM constitution which was adopted in 1922. The Second Boy Scout International Conference became the first meeting of the new WOSM and the first committee was elected in 1922. WOSM then took over the running (and financing) of the International Bureau. References to the 1922 date for the first committee and first committee members are probably the most common and accessible records.101.170.85.82 (talk) 16:00, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Already handled by a real editor, thanks Trollberg ben Trollblatt.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 16:37, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Last shots over the edit warring

Yeh, belatedly. After you and Gadget850 reverted the same change half a dozen times, you decide to actually check the facts and, oh, the editor you label and disparage was correct all along. So how come, in a decade old article, you and your "real editor", whole project group and registered users couldn't get the foundation date correct without my edits?101.170.85.60 (talk) 18:18, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Conspiracy much? Gadget didn't touch your trolly edits, I did because they looked tainted from go. When he did correct it, see what he did? He wrote it in a non-agenda, non-POV way like you would have if you were a real editor and not a troll. KTHXBYE.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 02:55, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Gadget did some earlier wholesale reversions but then more appropriately re-edited specifics and looked for references to support previously unsupported statements. The danger in looking for sources to support a POV is in what Gadget has done regarding WOSM members. Gadget has used the WOSM data on national scout organization enrolments (some of which is way out of date) and, because it uses the word "members" he chooses to ignore the fact, established from the WOSM constitution, that these 36 million are not in fact members of the WOSM. This is specious use of sources. Further, Gadget reworded the first paragraph statement about member numbers so that it is not wrong but it is vague, misleading and deceptive while the way the data is used in the infobox is just false. To his credit, Gadget went off and checked and eventually came around on the issue of the founding date as 1922 and added sources but that date is what I had contributed several times and and you repeatedly just reverted it for your own agenda instead of doing the research to check the facts. As the 1922 date and source were already detailed in the History section, I saw no need to refer to the source in the introduction. This article wouldn't pass first reading with an academic or commercial editorial board. At the moment it tells a nice story about the WOSM rather than explain what it is and how it relates to the world. This is supposed to be an encyclopaedia entry not the WOSM's homepage or a reference from a friend. It needs more balance and to include relevant information, even when negative of the WOSM. Look at the delay and reluctance to accept just a date change, then the resistance to use unambiguous statements about membership because it would require giving up glowing claims of millions of members, let alone the absolute refusal to allow anything touching on critical of the WOSM. Who has an agenda Kintetsubuffalo? 101.170.213.54 (talk) 10:02, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

I'll try to lose sleep over what some troll IP says. Yawn...--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 10:53, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Malaysia?

With the goals of lowering costs and demonstrating Scouting's commitment to Third World countries, WOSM (World Organization of the Scout Movement) is planning to move its headquarters halfway around the world, from Geneva Switzerland, to Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The move will take place over the next few months. World Scout Foundation offices will remain in Geneva.

I don't have a reliable source right now. --  Gadget850 talk 19:10, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

World War II

Wilson briefly touches on international meetings during the war, and an International Weekend[1] Does anyone have more information?--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 11:43, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

to be added in later

advocacy

Founder?

165

edit-warring by User:Maczkopeti

Members List

Related Articles

Wikiwand AI