Talk:Girl Guide and Girl Scout

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Girl Scouts[edit]

The article states that Girl Scout redirects here. This implies that girls Scout is just alternative name. In the UK, at least, this is not true: a girl Scout is a female member of a Scout group, separate from the Girl Guides movement. Bazza 09:15, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully is my edit more clear? A Girl Scout can also be a female Boy Scout. Sounds funny, but can you live with it? --Egel Reaction? 11:21, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It would have been better directed at Scouting because, at least in the UK, we don't have the term "Boy Scout", and that article makes itself very clear at the start that it is specifically an article about the boy. There is no equivalent Girl Scout article which makes it difficult, acknowledged in "Boy Scouts" discussion page. This highlights a problem with the various Scout and Guide pages — the assumption is that everywhere works the same: obviously not. I've linked to Scouting (as is suggested in that discussion page) — feel free to change again and discuss more. Bazza 13:45, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The article Boy Scout had had lots of "vandalism" from people who thought that article is about the Boy Scouts of America. The first line is there to tell: "this is an an organisation-neutral article about the young person not about a organisation". And the article is about the age-group 11 to 14/17, so not about Beavers, Cubs, Explorers, Ventures, Rovers etc. The only title we could find that somewhat excluses the other ages-groups and the WAGGGS Girl Scouts was Boy Scout.
But when you read the article Boy Scout and read "boys" as "boys and girls" and "Boy Scout" as "Scout" does it fit the UK situation? I think it fits situation in the Netherlands.
I have changed the first line of Boy Scout. Is this better?
But please make a small Girl Scout article is you want.
--Egel Reaction? 15:24, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to know why the article for Girl Scouts makes no mention whatsoever of Juliette Gordon Low or the actual history of Girl Scouting? I was a Girl Scout for twelve years and never once heard of this Baden-Powell character. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.99.220.21 (talk) 21:35, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Because this article is about Girl Guides and Girl Scouts with an international perspective. You want Girl Scouts of the USA which discusses Juliette Gordon Low at length. Baden-Powell was the founder of the Scout and Guide movements. --Bduke (Discussion) 22:43, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Country-specific info[edit]

Such info goes in association-specific articles, not here (per project agreement), if you are knowledgeable in an area, please move this info...

Girl Guides in UK[edit]

The Guides are split up into age groups.

  • Rainbows 5 to 7 year olds. Rainbows work from the four areas of the Rainbow Jigsaw - Look, Learn, Love and Laugh.
  • Brownies 7 to 10 year olds. Brownies work from the Brownie Adventure which is divided into three areas, You, Community and World. Brownies can also work towards interest badges covering a variety of subjects.
  • Guides 10 to 14 year olds. Guides work from the 5 Zones, Healthy Lifestyles, Global Awareness, Skills and Relationships, Celebrating diversity, Discovery. Guides can choose to work on Challenge Badges, Go For Its, Interest badges and the Baden-Powell Challenge which is the highest award that a Guide can gain.


Senior Section 14-26.

  • Young Leaders Work with Rainbows, Brownies or Guides. Can work towards Making It Count or the Adult Leadership scheme as well as other Senior Section opportunities.
  • Guiders (18+) Work with Rainbows, Brownies or Guides in a leadership role and are working on/have completed the Adult Leadership Scheme.
  • Rangers Meet together to plan and carry out activities, they may work towards any opportunities avaliable to Senior Section members.
  • Member of a Look Wider group A Senior Section member who has chosen to focus on the Look Wider scheme.
  • Duke of Edinburgh’s Award Participant a Senior Section member who has chosen to focus on the Duke of Edinburgh’s Award.
  • Lone Senior Section member A Senior Section member who is working on part of the Senior Section programme, but is not part of a unit.
  • In4mer Anyone who has undergone the 4ward, 4 self, 4 others peer education training
  • Guide member of SSAGO For Senior Section members who are studying at university or college.
  • Female member of LINK
  • Appointment Holder
  • Trefoil Guild Member

Senior Section Awards and Qualifications

  • Making it Count (leadership)
  • Chief Guide’s Challenge
  • Commonwealth Award
  • Queen’s Guide Award
  • Residential permits
  • Adult Leadership Qualification
  • Duke of Edinburgh’s Award

This information has now been moved to the Girlguiding UK page. There's a lot of work still to do to get it into shape on that page and all help is welcome. Kingbird 16:38, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Girl Guides of Canada[edit]

Canada is one of the many countries that take part in Girl Guides. In French, it is called Guides du Canada. In Canada, the levels of Guiding are:

Sparks: Sparks are the first level of Guiding for girls ages 5-6. The correct uniform is: pink shorts/leggings/sweatpants, and a pink t-shirt/sweatshirt. A pink pinny for badges is also part of the uniform. Every level of Guiding has a special promise recited at meetings. The Spark's promise is: I promise to share and be a friend. The Sparks now have their own program book and badges, like the Brownies, Guides and Pathfinders program.

Brownies: Brownies are the second level for girls ages 7-8. They wear orange shirts/t-shirts, blue pants/shorts/skirts, and white ties with orange leaves. A navy blue badge sash is worn across the right shoulder. The Brownie promise is: I promise to be true to myself, my god/faith, and Canada. I will help other people and keep the Brownie law.

Guides: Guides are the third level for girls ages 9-11. They wear pale blue shirts/t-shirts, navy pants/shorts, and white ties with blue leaves. The navy blue badge sash is also worn. The promise is similar to the brownie promise. It is: I promise to do my best, to be true to myself, my god/faith, and Canada. I will help others and respect the guiding law.

Pathfinders: Considered to be the last juvenile level, Pathfinders are the next level, for girls 12-14. They wear green and white t-shirts/white long sleeved shirts, navy pants/shorts, and white ties with green leaves, and a navy badge sash is worn. The Pathfinder promise is the same as the Guides' promise. Before, the Pathfinder program was mostly bookwork and discussions, but now, there is a new program that has been made of the girls' suggestions.

Senior Branches: Here, the program branches out into three differant programs, Rangers, Cadets, and Junior Leaders. Each branch has its own colour, red for Rangers, yellow for Cadets and navy for Junior Leaders. Senior Branches often wear the same uniform as the adult leaders, although a red Senior Branches t-shirt is now available. The Senior Branches are treated as junior adults because they are considered to be future Guide leaders. Their promise is the same as the Guides and Pathfinders.

Further details and history of the Girl Guides can be found in the article on Scouting.

moved by RlevseRlevse 20:07, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

English vs American spellings[edit]

What is the norm for this artical, English or American, because program is spelt programme, and I am not familar with English spellings to an extent that I can edit with it. Darthgriz98 01:09, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since we're going with Guide, I'd use Brit spelling. In Brit, program is programme. Rlevse 01:14, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Confusion[edit]

This article, and its relationship with Scouting, Boy Scout are unclear. I get the impression that there is a thought by some authors that the terminology used world-wide is the same. It is not. This article starts by saying that Girl Guide and Girl Scout are synonymous. That may be true in some parts of the world, but not all. In the UK, a Girl Guide is a member of the Girls Guides movement, whereas a girl Scout (with a small G) is a female member of the Scouting movement. (Likewise, there are no Boy Scouts, only boy Scouts). I appreciate that this is different in other parts of the world. Bazza 13:10, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But when you read the article Boy Scout and read "boys" as "boys and girls" and "Boy Scout" as "Scout" does it fit the UK situation? I think it fits the situation in the Netherlands. If so, we can start clearing up the confusion with the articles. If not what are the differences?
Are these definitions right or or at least well enough for an outsider:
  • a girl in a girls-only troup is a Girl Guide or Girl Scout
  • a girl in a co-educational troup is a (girl) Scout
--Egel Reaction? 14:39, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, Boy Scout with the gender-specific parts reworded seem OK. The information on leader structure and committees is not accurate for the UK at least but could be reworded to make them more general, or split into country/region sections. Your definitions above are not strictly true - you could get an all-girl Scout group, but I don't know if there are any yet. (The same also applies, by the way, to Cubs in the UK.) I do not know if there are any boys who are part of Girl Guides, although the opportunity is open regardless of gender. Bazza 15:10, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The problem with the information on leader structure and committees is that the BSA has no group-level but many country/region levels and the rest(?) of the world has group-, district-, county-, nation-level. And the article started (somewhat) BSA-baised.
I know the "definitions" are not strictly true, but there are many national organisations were boys and girls only work together at national level and have a different (Boy) Scout and (Girl) Guide programme.
Scouting Nederland (WAGGGS and WOSM) has co-ed, boys-only and girls-only units and Groups. Some of the girls-only units are more in the Guide tradition and some more in the Scout tradition.
Yes, there are boys in Girl Guides: in Slovenia, Spain and Greece, the national Guide association has opted to admit both boys and girls, and the national Scout association has remained a separate boys-only movement.
--Egel Reaction? 17:08, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
We've been through all this before (see Project talk page during Sep). This is the article structure we came up with. I do agree some wording could be improved, though. Due to all the variations of membership, etc around the world, it would be exteremely different if not impossible to cover them all in a neat, non excessively wordy fashion. This GG/GS article is meant to be a female counterpart to the Boy Scout article. In some countries, the male/female programs have become mixed, but certainly not all. Making only a Boy Scout article is not the answer either. GG/GS as used at the top of the article specifically mention they are synonomous WITHIN the article. If you can find a way to succinctly improve the article, by all means do so. Rlevse 21:02, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Somone please diambiguate the links to Girl Guides[edit]

Could one of the experts here please go through and disambiguate the links to Girl Guides. Thanks a million! (Or 245 -- which is the number of links the the page ;-). Ewlyahoocom 06:33, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but this will take awhile. I did a few just now.Rlevse 10:51, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GA?[edit]

What all is needed for GA? I saw the stuff on the taskforce page and can't find where it says what we have left to do with it. Darthgriz98 20:06, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See if you can expand the Activities and Organization sections more. A couple pics of girls having fun would be good too. Use Boy Scout as a model as that one made GA easily. It needs more refs too. Let me know if you have questions, I'm still trying to get Our Chalet ready for GA submission.Rlevse 21:03, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think the point raised at [1] needs to be addressed first... Horus Kol Talk 01:09, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't, this article is much closer to GA that the proposed Guiding article. This article is about the individual girl, not the movement, which the Guiding would be about, which I'm still not convinced we should do.Rlevse 01:17, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The point I'm trying to make is that this article contains information which is generic to Guiding and should not be in here - this article is partway between a Guiding article and an article on the Girl Guide - that is what needs to be addressed. Horus Kol Talk 01:37, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think so. The article sections are very similar to Boy Scout, though not as detailed, and no one has said that about the Boy Scout article.Rlevse 01:47, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have a problem with the section headings - but if you actually compare the content within sections like Foundation, you'll see that the Girl Guide and Girl Scout article has a lot more information which is better placed in a Guiding article. This level of detail isn't in the Boy Scout article, and rightly so, because there is the Scouting article to deal with this. Horus Kol Talk 11:16, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Finding pics of the girls is always tough since most are not free images, I'll try to find something though and I'll begin work on that section tomorrow. Darthgriz98 01:22, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have posted my thoughts on the creation of a Guiding article at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scouting. Kingbird 20:40, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I made various edits, such as cleanup and copyediting to the page. Is there anything I can do? Sjones23 20:09, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Any constructive improvements are appreciated. You could join the Scouting Project and GG/GS taskforce too. Rlevse 20:15, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Girl Guides UK seems to be a little stingy when it comes to giving out information on what exactly they do for fun and activities or how they are organized, at least on their main page. I've been working on those sections for quite some time, still looking. Anything else we can do? Pictures are hard to find since most aren't free or they don't say if they are copyrighted. I sent an email, oh on Thanksgiving, to GSUSA's legal department asking about fair use images, and I'm STILL waiting for them to get back to me. Girl Guiding UK would probably be the same thing. DarthGriz98 04:51, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What kind of info were you hoping to get out of Girlguiding UK? Badges and awards? Typical meeting? I'm not clear what you'd like. Kingbird 21:09, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Information on the activities they do and how it is organized, like we have in the boy scout article. I haven't been able to find much on organization. DarthGriz98 04:10, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Troops[edit]

I'm concerned about the use of the word "troop" in the second paragraph of the article. My understanding is that there in no one word that is used worldwide for those local groups of Guides and Girl Scouts. There are several words, different ones more common in different places. So I'd prefer it if troop isn't the one we used at the start of the article. Local group is the phrase I would use, but I want to know what other people think. Kingbird 19:42, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Revert war[edit]

ANON IP 88.108.95.228...four different editors have reverted you. If you can't work this out here on the talk page, you will get blocked for disruption and/or WP:3RR violation. I'm posting this on the article page, Girl Guide and Girl Scout's talk page and on your talk page.Sumoeagle179 20:43, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have been watching this edit war - and find it amusing! I actually would agree with the Anon Editors contribution reference the title article part. There is inconsistency with the article headers on the Boy Scout and Girl Scout pages. The Boy scout page mentions 'for girl troops see Girl Scout' whereas the Girl Scout page has no reference. I think the annonymous editors contributions were in good taste and respect for the article. How can you say he/she has caused disruption? --Gothgirlangel1981 21:23, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By starting a revert war, ignoring consensus, and refusing to discuss on the article talk page after being kindly asked more than once. REverting multiple users over the same issue is not a way to build consensus. Doing so 4 times in under 24 hours is a 3RR violation, that's how.Sumoeagle179 21:36, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am going to try to balance this! For everyone's sake! I have also noticed the inconsistencies on the Girl and Boy Scout pages. I am also a girl - rather than a boy so my opinions should count. The fact is by the look of things, their is a gender-bias on the article - and all the anon editor seems to be doing is balance it and refer to as many sub-links as possible. He/she may have caused problems with some other articles, as appears to be the case - but they seem to have good intentions and heart on these edits. --Gothgirlangel1981 21:29, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

As I said on my talk page - maybe the Anon user is new - give them time to settle in. --Gothgirlangel1981 21:54, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest that Gothgirlangel1981 and the anon editor have a misunderstanding. They both describe the section as a header section. It is not. It is a disambiguation section to lead people who came here looking for something else to get to the right place. This article is for girls in WAGGGS organisations which are mostly all girl organisations. The disambiguation page is to send the reader to the article that is about girls in WOSM organisations which can be mixed boys and girls. There really is no need to send people to the article on boys as they are unlikely to get to the Girl Guide and Girl Scout article looking for an article about boys. There is a lack of balance precisely because WAGGGS organisations rarely accept boys, but very many WOSM organisations accept girls. A disambiguation section is not a "see also" section and it does not have to be balanced. It has to help people who need help to get to the right article. However, I see no problem with the disambiguation section now and note that the article has been protected to avoid a revert war. If there is a lack of cross references, that should be addressed in the article, not in the disambiguation section. Make suggestions here and an admin may add them to the article. --Bduke 23:08, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Co-ed guides[edit]

A small list to start a section about co-ed guides:

Country Member organization Membership status Membership (from 2006 or most recent) Year Guiding organization joined WAGGGS Year Guiding was introduced Admits girls/boys
Argentina Asociación Guías Argentinas full 3,251 1958 1915 both
Bahamas The Bahamas Girl Guides Association full 2,732 1975 1915 both? (no website)
Belgium Guides Catholiques de Belgique full (via GSB) about 23,000 1928 1915/1956 both 1979
Brazil Federação de Bandeirantes do Brasil full 4,454 1930 1919 both
Cyprus Girl Guides Association of Cyprus full 2,763 1962 1912 both
Estonia Eesti Gaidide Liit full 776 1928/1993 1919 both?
Germany Pfadfinderinnenschaft Sankt Georg full (via RDP) about 10,000 1950 1931/1947 both (only regional)
Greece Soma Hellinidon Odigon full 14,622 1933 1932 both
Honduras Asociación Nacional de Muchachas Guías de Honduras full 5,484 1981 1953 both? (no website)
Paraguay Asociación Guías Scouts del Paraguay full 329 1966 1923 both
Peru Asociación Nacional de Guías Scouts del Perú full 5,500 1960 1916 both
Romania Asociaţia Ghidelor şi Ghizilor din România full 627 1993 1928 both
Slovenia Združenje slovenskih katoliških skavtinj in skavtov full 4,173 1928/1996 1922 both (not realy a guide organisation)
Spain Federacion Española de Guidismo full (via CEGE) about 1,000 1969 1948/1984 both
Uruguay Asociación Guías Scout del Uruguay associate 71 1966 1924 both? (no website)

Hong Kong: only 4-6 is co-ed

--Egel Reaction? 10:25, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jamaica has a website here. They don't mention accepting boys at any level. The WAGGGS website entry for this association doesn't specify "admits boys" either way. Kingbird 16:28, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Missing: Belgium (GCB); Cyprus; Germany (PSG in some regions; VCP nationwide); Romania; Spain.
And you should not forget that nearly all merged associations in Europe run a single programm for both genders, frequently in mixed groups - even if they call male members Scouts and female Guides. --jergen 09:23, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And Why do you state that ZSKSS is "not really a Guide organisation" - that is quite strange comment given the fact that WAGGGS welcomes different interpretation of the Guide/Scout methode. What are your criterias for stating this? --jergen 09:26, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
My criteria for co-ed Guide organisation for this table is a organisation in the female tradition which became co-ed in their core section(s) without merger with a boys organisation.
You are right, I missed the organisation under a umbrella and names that looks like having "scouts" and "guides" in some form. Could you add the right organisations from Spain and Germany?
--Egel Reaction? 13:11, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Following your criteria I could not include the German Verband Christlicher Pfadfinderinnen und Pfadfinder which is a merged organization that has full WOSM and WAGGGS membership for all 47,000 members - and not a split membership like many other merged organizations. --jergen 15:06, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And another comment on Slovenia: The actual situation is the result of WOSM's newer membership policy of non-acceptance of WAGGGS members. --jergen 15:09, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The Slovenia situation in the words of a ZSKSS-member (14 year): Not all scouts are religius, some are and some anrnt. We have masses, pray before and after breakfest, dinner, lounch,..So our leaders are trying to developt us not only in physical way but on spiritual and that is the mane diferenc betwen our two scout organizations in Slovenia, we have all the same goals to tech people how to be in nature, scout knowlage,...but like i told you, we are olso in spiritual knowlage. We scouts are in WAGGGS, Other group "Taborniki" are in WOSM. There is no big deference betwen us.
Now we have a number of the co-ed-ness of WAGGGS-only members and were they are co-ed: around 80,000 and in Europe and South America. Around 2,000,000 WAGGGS-members are in a co-ed merged organisation. --Egel Reaction? 16:57, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
For Paraguay see this images: [2], [3]. --jergen 10:31, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to be made[edit]

Since the page has been locked for editing - I gather there's a war going on? - someone who can ought to correct the link for the "Khyber Guides." Based on my research I think this has to be a reference to the Corps of Guides (British India). —Preceding unsigned comment added by SCGC (talk • contribs) 00:57, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've unlocked it. It's been protected long enough.Rlevse 01:07, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

link to old Girl Guides article[edit]

Here's what the Girl Guides article looked like before I redirected it here just now. I think most of the info from there is already here, but I'm providing this link in case I'm wrong. [4] --Allen 01:33, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's a reason it was left like that. Jergen will gladly explain it to you. I'll drop him a note.Rlevse 01:35, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about that. It looked like a simple oversight to me. --Allen 01:38, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please have a look at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scouting/Archive 4#Girl Guides - dab or stub? This is most inclusive discussion on this topic.
Thanks for calling this up; I should check again the pages linking Girl Guide, Girl Scout, Girl Scouts, Boy Scouts etc.; there should be some that could be corrected to more detailed articles. --jergen 07:57, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Content discussion[edit]

There is a discussion in progress involving the content of this page at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scouting/Archive 5#Girl Guiding and Girl Scouting article modifications. Kingbird (talk) 06:08, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I updated the link above to where it really is in the archive. --Bduke (Discussion) 03:08, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:WAGGGS.svg[edit]

The image Image:WAGGGS.svg 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. --07:21, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Girl Guides merge[edit]

Propose merge: both article seem to be about the same idea of Girl Guiding and Girl Scouting as a movement. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 18:20, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Or merge it with Boy Scout to form an article about the sections in the 11-17 agegroup.--Egel Reaction? 11:05, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • As a movement, the name should take the active form: Scouting or Guiding
  • Looking at Age groups in Scouting and Guiding, only three organizations use "Girl Guides" as a section name; most use "Guides" or the language equivalent
  • Girl Guiding and Girl Scouting: if this is supposed to be about the section, then:
    • 1⁄3 of the article is about the Guide name
    • 1⁄3 of the article is key points or ideals
    • 1⁄3 is about the original uniform
  • I really do not see it as a section article

--—— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 13:20, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • If it is not about the section, then the first sentence "A Guide, Girl Guide or Girl Scout is a member of a section of some Guiding organisations who is between the ages of 10 and 14" really needs changing. --Bduke (Discussion) 22:40, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • One of the articles should be about the girl-centred section for 11 to 17 year olds and one about the girl-centred movement -> Be constructive, make a decision which is which and change the articles accordingly, merging of the articles would only make matters worse.
  • you second argument, I don't understand. Is it relevant? The article can't be named Guide, that name is already been taken and you need a name that most readers will recognize as members in the girl-centred movement. --Egel Reaction? 14:50, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question[edit]

I dont know if here is the right place to ask a quedtion of not, by the way, if there is anyone who knows something about the photo I would be pleased if s/he tell me about the girl that is looking directly to the camera, her name and E-mail or anything else. here is my E-mail: vandida2000@yahoo.com Thankyou. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.115.16.209 (talk) 20:16, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, this is not the place to ask for personal information about a person in a photgraph and no editor should give you that information. WP respects privacy. --Bduke (Discussion) 21:03, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Read Bduke's talk page, that would be MOST improper. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:32, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Persistent critter. He has also asked, Oct. 29, the person who posted the picture in wikimedia commons Commons:User Talk:Noebse. --Erp (talk) 04:35, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No clear consensus to move. Needs some discussion at the project level first. Mike Cline (talk) 23:14, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]


relisted -Mike Cline (talk) 21:18, 1 December 2011 (UTC) – This naming has been a mess for a while, and this seems like a simple and substantial improvement. This article is currently named for the movement, but is about the individual section called "Girl Guides" or "Girl Scouts". The page on the movement is currently named for this the individual members, despite the movement actually being called "Girl Guiding". I'm also open to the current Girl Guides page being called Girl Guiding and Girl Scouting, since the movement goes by "Girl Scouting" in some regions, but I really do think it is too confusing to have the current situation where the names are basically reversed. 86.163.1.168 (talk) 14:24, 23 November 2011 (UTC) Oops, got logged out. That was me. GirlGuider1910 (talk) 14:32, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Merger[edit]

There's really no reason for Girl Guides to be a separate article. It duplicates much of the information here and there seems to be no clear dividing line. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:11, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to merge Girl Guiding and Girl Scouting, it is better to merge it "sideways" to Scout (Scouting) instead of "upwards" to Girl Guides.--Egel Reaction? 10:32, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No. This article is about the section for girls between 11 and 14. There are other articles for the other sections at Rainbow (Girl Guides), Brownie Guide and Ranger (Girl Guide). Girl Guides is about the whole Girl Guide and Girl Scout movement. Merging anything to articles that do not contain the word Guide will not be acceptable to members of the WAGGGS organisations who are very attached to that word and the distinction from the WOSM organisations. If any one merge is done, others should also be done, so I suggest you raise this on the Scouting WikiProject pages, although it has been widely discussed in the past. I oppose any merges. --Bduke (Discussion) 17:07, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Girl Guides and Girl Scouts are technically two separate organizations. Girl Scouts refers only to Girl Scouts of America while Girl Guides is prominent in many other countries. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.73.225.12 (talk) 07:15, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See List of World Association of Girl Guides and Girl Scouts members— there are at least six organizations using Girl Scout in their name. --— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 13:34, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is no organization called Girl Scouts of America. It is Girl Scouts of the USA (GSUSA). GSUSA is a member organization of the World Association of Girl Scouts and Girl Guides (WAGGGS) which includes organizations that use the terms Girl Guides, Guides, and Girl Scouts. If I understand the idea of merging the two articles, my opinion is that there should only be one article, with the title being Girl Guides and Girl Scouts. The article about Girl Guiding and Girl Scouting attempts to be too specific about what Girl Guides and Girl Scouts are and do, but there is a wide variety throughout the WAGGGS organization. Other, non WAGGGS member organizations may have a different structure. The Key Points should be moved to the Girl Guides and Girl Scouts article with updates linked to the WAGGe GS web site. Otherwise articles about what Girl Guides or Girl Scouts are should be sent to the organization specific web page. phrogster (talk) 01:31, 8 February 2013 (UTC)Phrogster[reply]

We clearly have not got this right yet and we have the same situation in Boy Scout/Scout articles. However a simple merger does not address the point that we have articles on Rainbow Guides, Ranger Guides, Brownie Guides (and over the border, articles on Cub Scouts, Rover Scouts etc), and we have a general article on the movement of Girl Scouting and Girl Guiding? I think these are all necessary. So why not have an article on the original section after Brownies and before Rangers (with changes of course explaining that sections for the same age group have different names in different places and the age ranges are not always the same). I am not opposed to change but we need to look at the wider picture than these two articles. Perhaps we should get rid of all the section articles and just have one article on "Age sections in Scouting and Guiding" that deals with the sections and age ranges in general terms, and then an article on "Scouting". the whole movement, as now and one on the movement that is still largely restricted to female members with the organisations largely affiliated to WAGGGS, while the organisations for boys only, or boys and girls, are not all affiliated to WOSM. It is all very confusing. --Bduke (Discussion) 07:49, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I made the same point on age groups somewhere on one of the various section articles. These separate so-called generic articles don't do a very good overview of the movement as a whole. We have been at this for years and haven't gotten anywhere. Lets focus on this one merger for now, but later we might consider renaming this article to Guiding to reflect the inclusion of boys in parts of the movement. --— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 10:49, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Merge Girl Guides here[edit]

  • support Girl Guides duplicates much of Girl Guiding and Girl Scouting --— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 10:49, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Most the international Scouting organizations use Guide and Scout relatively interchangeably. Where the distinction is notable, it should be made plain in the opening blurb of a single cohesive article (which can then split into more specific pages such as Girl Scouts in Country X, Girl Guides in Country Y, etc. I pointed Girl Scouts to the Girl Guides page and moved the disambiguation text that was on the Girl Scouts page to Girl Scouts (disambiguation). I then added a hatnote to the Girl Guides page which links to the Girl Guides (disambiguation) which redirects back to the Girl Scouts (disambiguation) page. I hope by doing this that I've not favored Girl Guides or Girl Scouts but tried to mostly take advantage of where a term is already seeing the most use. I think the two main article pages on this topic should be merged. Banaticus (talk) 06:12, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have been a bit bold and moved the movement parts. --Egel Reaction? 12:48, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • This merge discussion is nearly a year old and the merge was never done. It still does not resolve the issue that Girl Guides is about the section comparable to the Scout section in Scouting. We have articles on Brownies, Cubs, Rovers, Rangers, so we should have articles on the Scout section and the Guide section. I have removed the merge tag, but please start up a new discussion if you have ideas to resolve this problem. --Bduke (Discussion) 21:25, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This article is a mess[edit]

I can't understand the point of this article and why it exists separately from Girl Guides and Girl Scouts. If it's supposed to be about the individual scouts or guides themselves (as opposed to the organization or activity), then why is it called Girl Guiding and Girl Scouting? This article should be retitled and rewritten or someone should just be bold and redirect it. It's been 10+ years of people complaining about it, and it's little more than a stub. —МандичкаYO 😜 20:20, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is supposed to be about the section that is for girls from about 11 upwards. Like all the other articles about sections, the different names cause confusion. We have articles on Brownies, Cubs, Rovers, Rangers etc., so we should have one on the original sections for Guides and Scouts. Or we should delete all of them and just have a general article on Sections in Scouting and Guiding. --Bduke (Discussion) 21:27, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Girl_Guide_and_Girl_Scout&oldid=1211857009"