Talk:13th World Scout Jamboree

message: Define what makes it extraneous or spam. I didn't put the link on, but I do watch the article. Your welcome is unnecessary, I've been here two years. Chris 05:08, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It was a standard template - no offense. I deleted the link because it didn't meet the external link guidelines - the description even said it was an unofficial site. RJASE1  Talk  05:10, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Point me to the "external link guidelines"-this site does not advertise anything, it is the recollections of an attendee. Chris 05:15, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The criteria I'm thinking of are here, numbers 1 and 3. RJASE1  Talk  05:50, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Reading that site, as I assume you have done, I find it does provide a unique resource beyond what the article would contain if it became a Featured article (point 1), a personal view that is not encyclopedic in itself, but a worthwhile read for someone wanting to dig deeper; and is _not_ mainly intended to promote a website (point 3), it just says "here's another view if you're interested." I am replacing the link as both guidelines are satisfied, and copying this dialogue to the article's talkpage to explain why I am doing so. Chris 06:14, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: removal of external link

message: Not sure why 216.235.111.65s adds were undone.  They are quite true, so I reinstated them.  In fact, I attended the 13th WJ and was in group JKT.  And yes, we did suffer a day, and a very stormy night  before being evacuated.  (Most of my troop huddling in a couple of the larger leaders tents, rather than in our own smaller individual tents.  Raging wind and rain outside.)  When we returned, there was debris everywhere.  Quite an experience for a 14-year old kid. Wouldn't trade it for the world.  :-)  --Wws (talk) 16:05, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Because this is an encyclopedia and not a journal or a blog. Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 03:00, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Description of JKT/TJK/etc

message: The paragraphs that describe the Jamboree experience from an American point of view should be clearly separated.  Americans are not the only Scouts that speak English.  I am sure readers would like to read about the Jamboree, not just the American experience and, if that is what they are looking, it should be clearly labeled so.
For example, it is stated that medical services were provided by US armed forces.  We had some injured troop members and there were no Americans in our designated first aid station.  Thus, besides being disrespectful to our wonderful hosts, it is plainly wrong. 
Likewise, we had not JKT, JTK or XYZ whatever.  If that was how Americans organized themselves, good for them, but don't generalize it to the experience of others.
Thanks DevaSatyam (talk) 18:15, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:SOFIXIT.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 01:28, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:   I attended the 13th World Jamboree.   What difference does it make?    Instead of complaining about the article, add to it.  What is actually informative about the article is the external link to the website that gentleman made about it  Connor7617 (talk) 02:05, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too American-centric 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on 13th World Scout Jamboree. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081207021528/http://www.scout.org/wsrc/fs/jamboree_e.shtml to http://www.scout.org/wsrc/fs/jamboree_e.shtml
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:56, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: There is only one source cited for the whole article. 
Moreover, the largely uncited information appears to be based on unpublished recollections of participants. 
This impression is augmented by comments in the discussion, where editors are referencing their personal experiences rather than citing sources. 
Finally, the tone of the article reads like a memoir or oral history, not an encyclopedia. It uses subjective language like, "Never to be forgotten" and "A lifetime of fulfilling memories".
I added templates at the start of the article to note citation and research issues. Flowernerd (talk) 20:40, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lack of citations, original research, not encyclopedic tone.