Talk:Bronze Wolf Award

message: Does anyone know about the Silver Wolf award? Chris 00:00, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: See Silver Wolf Award (The Scout Association) for more information.--Dthomsen8 (talk) 17:46, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Silver Wolf 

message: Recipients:
* Mohamed Afilal (Morocco)
* Richard Burdick (USA)
* Chao Shou-Po (Scouts of China)
* Fujio Imada (Japan)
* Christos Lygeros (Greece)
* Patrick Lyon d’Andrimont (Chile)
* W. Garth Morrison (United Kingdom)
* Léonard Offoumou Yapo (Côte d’Ivoire)
* Saiful Islam Khan (Bangladesh)
* Manuel Pinto (Scouting) (Uganda)
* Jack Sinclair (Scouting) (Canada)
* Anthony Thng (Singapore)
* Costas Tsantilis (Greece)
* Jerry Voros (USA)
Deceased recipients:
*Betty Clay (United Kingdom)
* Fujio Imada (Japan)
* Colin James Inglis (South Africa)
* Ernest Mehinto (Benin)
* Lt. Gen. (ret) Mashudi (Indonesia)
* Tassos Sagos (Greece)
* Yoshio Sakurauchi (Japan)
* Akira Watanabe (Scouting) (Japan)
* Toshio Yamanaka (Japan) not listed at List of recipients of the Bronze Wolf Award
Source: https://web.archive.org/web/20080705154443/https://www.scout.org/en/content/download/6314/59099/file/TR_2002-2005_7_EN.pdf
:Note: the source says that these people in the list are "several holders of the Bronze Wolf Award, and one former member of the World Scout Committee". At least one of them so is not a Bronze Wolf Award recipient.
:--Lou Crazy (talk) 23:03, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: 2002 to 2005

message: Recipients:
* King Bhumibol Adulyadej (Thailand)
* Kirsty M. Brown (Australia)
* David Bull (Scouting) (United Kingdom)
* William Cockcroft (United Kingdom)
* William F. Cronk (United States of America)
* Henry R. Hall (United Kingdom)
* Klaus Johann Jacobs (Switzerland)
* Shri Lalit Mohan Jain (India)
* Toby Takemichi Suzuki (Japan)
* Yongyudh Vajiradhul (Thailand)
Deceased recipients:
* Yehuda Barkai (Israel)
* Mario Bertoldi (Italy) not listed at List of recipients of the Bronze Wolf Award
* Peter Cooke (United Kingdom)
* Edouard Duvigneaud (Belgium) not listed at List of recipients of the Bronze Wolf Award - see also discussion below
* Steve Fossett (U.S.A.)
* Malek K. Gabr (Egypt)
* Bruce H. Garnsey (Australia)
* Edward C. Joullian III (U.S.A.)
* Geoff Lee (Australia)
* Nicolas N'diaye (Senegal)
* Shintarō Negishi (Japan)
* Jeremiah J. Nyagah (Kenya)
* Yapo Léonard Offoumou (Côte d’Ivoire)
* John C. Parish (Scouting) (U.S.A.)
* Philippe Pijollet (France)
* Manuel Pinto (Uganda)
* Sven Erik Ragnar (Sweden)
* Eugene F. Reid (U.S.A.)
* Ken Stevens (Scouting) (United Kingdom)
* Bunsom Martin (Thailand)
Source: 
:Note: the source says that these people in the list are "several holders of the Bronze Wolf Award and/or former members of the World Scout Committee and World Scout Bureau:".
:This means that most of them are not Bronze Wolf Award recipients.
:--Lou Crazy (talk) 23:03, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: 2005 to 2008

message: * 1998: Baldur Hermans (Germany), Morris Zilka (Israel) Source
* 1997: Billy Goh Piak Chiang (Singapore) source
* 1995: Jean, Grand Duke of Luxembourg (Luxembourg) source
* 1993: Jørgen Guldborg-Rasmussen (Denmark) source; Fidel Valdez Ramos (Philippines) source
* 1991: Ee Peng Liang (Singapore) source
* 1987: Abdullah Omar Nasseef (Saudi Arabia) source
* 1961: Robert McGregor Macdonald Lockhart source
* unknown year: Hartmut Keyler (Germany) picture (center); John Randolph Donnell (US) source; A. Wallace Denny (US) source
* Full list of Japanese recipients: 
* Incomplete and unsourced listing of all recipients: 
<HR/>
In 2011 I warned against using the Triennial Report 2005-2008 as a source for recipient names. That report mentions Bronze Wolf recipients, former staff members, and former World Scout Committee members. I recently found a list of the whole staff of the World Scout Bureau in 2005, and on page 11 it mentions Mario Bertoldi as an office clerk. A source who worked there confirmed to me that he was a driver/factotum (of course it's not a source we can use for an article, but it is interesting). It is very unlikely that he would receive the Bronze Wolf. Also it would explain why he was listed :-)
So I suggest that all people marked as "not listed" be checked again, and probably their wikipedia articles should be marked as non-notable.
, you did a lot of work on those entires, so I am pinging you.
--Lou Crazy (talk) 16:50, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Earlier recipients

message: I have asked an admin to restore the deleted graphic, I argue that it is better than the off-center shady one used in the article now. Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 05:29, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The graphic had the wrong colours see:  (photo made by Piet J. Kroonenberg of his own Bronze Wolf) and . The colours in the photo are still a bit to light, the wolf should be darker. --Egel Reaction? 09:58, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Neither one is ideal, but the drawing is just plain bad.  — Rlevse • Talk •  11:05, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

text: Okay, but the drawing is based on the original WOSM graphic. So what in your view would make it better? I hate to see stuff deleted that people have made us when they're not even in the Scouting Project, they're just helping us out. Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 19:23, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: right shape and colours? Some more pictures of Bronze Wolf awards  --Egel Reaction? 22:55, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

text: Even though the issue was not resolved the first time? Leave it alone-I have in fact submitted it to the Graphics Lab. The photo will always be cockeyed. Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 17:59, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Please first look at the licenses of both pictures and WP:FAIR #1. :File:Bronze Wolf Award.png can't be used even after the work of the Graphics Lab.  --Egel Reaction? 18:15, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

text: You will really have to explain your interpretation, specifically. I don't read it the same way. The photo will always be cockeyed. Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 07:17, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:   :File:Bronze Wolf.jpg is free,  :File:Bronze Wolf Award.png can only be used under fair use.  Being cockeyed doesn't stop :File:Bronze Wolf.jpg from having a quality sufficient to serve the encyclopedic purpose. --Egel Reaction? 09:50, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

text: "Sufficient" and "quality" in this case are a mismatch yet. You're really going to have to sell me on the idea. Ed, can you see what you can do about removing the background on the Bronze Wolf photo and work your magic like on :File:Eagle Scout BSA.png? Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 10:04, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  graphic versus photo 

message: If I had know we had been here before, I would not have restored :File:Bronze Wolf Award.png. We can't have redundant copies of the same image like this without good reason. The graphic version is just not good. If you want someone to work on it, upload it to ImageShack. I'm going to delete it in a few hours. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 14:14, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Even though the issue was not resolved the first time? Leave it alone-I have in fact submitted it to the Graphics Lab. The photo will always be cockeyed. Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 17:59, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Please first look at the licenses of both pictures and WP:FAIR #1. :File:Bronze Wolf Award.png can't be used even after the work of the Graphics Lab.  --Egel Reaction? 18:15, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

text: You will really have to explain your interpretation, specifically. I don't read it the same way. The photo will always be cockeyed. Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 07:17, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:   :File:Bronze Wolf.jpg is free,  :File:Bronze Wolf Award.png can only be used under fair use.  Being cockeyed doesn't stop :File:Bronze Wolf.jpg from having a quality sufficient to serve the encyclopedic purpose. --Egel Reaction? 09:50, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

text: "Sufficient" and "quality" in this case are a mismatch yet. You're really going to have to sell me on the idea. Ed, can you see what you can do about removing the background on the Bronze Wolf photo and work your magic like on :File:Eagle Scout BSA.png? Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 10:04, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Redux

message: *User:btphelps recipients are notable, by their receipt of this award, they have de facto distinguished themselves. 
*User:Kintetsubuffalo confers notability to its recipients, per WP:ANYBIO, point 2.
*Jkudlick receipt of the Bronze Wolf not only meets point 1 – but also point 2, per WP:ANYBIO, would still require that the appropriate sources be added to the article, or sufficient time given to add such sources before taking any of those article to AfD.
*User:Bduke agree entirely with Jkudlick, as per comment above, have been holding off on this one, because I think these people are likely to be notable, but independent sources even showing that they have received it are thin on the ground, let alone sources that explain why they were awarded it.
*User:Hobit clearly meets the SNG for bios, we should assume they are likely notable, and if the sources are mostly pedestrian, this award would be enough to justify an article.
*User:Narky Blert notable. Full disclosure: one-time Senior Scout (UK), no involvement of any kind in Scouting for 50 years. My position is more nuanced than "confers notability" - it is public acknowledgment of notability. The difficulty often lies in finding sources; see WP:NEXIST. There is a difference between a self-congratulatory self-publicised company award like IBM Fellow, or the assorted vapid awards for reality show participants or the like, on the one hand; and, on the other hand, a major award by a major organisation which happens to be known only to specialists in a narrow field. Ever heard of the Silver Medal of the Zoological Society, or the Stamford Raffles Award? Thought not. Many of the recipients of those awards have Wiki articles; and those that haven't, should.
:IMO anyone that gets a Bronze Wolf Award has a more serious claim to notability than half-a-dozen of most mediaeval Polish starosts and English knights. Narky Blert (talk) 01:03, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Confers notability

message: *User:RoySmith Disagree about conferred notability, receiving this award is not, in and of itself, sufficient.
*User:HighKing Disagree about inherited/conferred notability, no doubt that many of these people are notable in their own right but that the articles as currently written do not emphasise this point.
*Concur with the above.  This is too narrow an award, about recreational activity, to confirm notability by itself, in absence of any other factor making the person notable. (And I say that as a former BSA scout, from Cub Scouts through Explorers, a thirteen-year involvement; I certainly have no prejudice against the organization.)  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  06:21, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Does not confer notability

message: [header added by RfC closer for ease of reference]
::Thanks all for your hard work! I'm good with that! I propose posting an infobox at the top of this talkpage, once the RfC is closed, to the effect of
This article was nominated for Request for comment on 6 January 2017.
The result of the discussion was There are many articles written about recipients of the Bronze Wolf award, but some of these articles may not currently include sufficient sourcing to meet the requirements of GNG. The nature of this award is such that recipients are often notable; WP:CSD admins should consider mention of the award in a bio as an indication why its subject is important or significant (WP:CSD#A7). Where sources are mostly pedestrian and on the borderline of satisfying GNG, this award is enough to justify an article. If adequate sources cannot be found, the fact that the subject is the recipient of the Bronze Wolf award is not sufficient reason to keep an article that doesn't satisfy GNG. Appropriate time should be provided to research a subject in order to find sources and bring the article to GNG. Note: Since many recipients may be from a pre-Internet era, from backgrounds and cultures where English is not the predominant language, or even from regions not given to broad Internet availability, extra care should be observed regarding WP:RECENTISM and WP:SYSTEMIC BIAS..
An archived record of this discussion can be found here.
::What do you think?--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 04:33, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes add this to the page. Receiving a BWA is a strong indication of probable notability, simply because the BWA is awarded for doing something extraordinary, it is not handed out to all and sundry just for selling lots of cookies. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 06:49, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: weak yes I prefer the previous paragraph, but this is an acceptable compromise. Hobit (talk) 11:52, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes - This is acceptable compromise language. — Jkudlick ⚓ t ⚓ c ⚓ s 23:29, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

text: Yes -- HighKing++   18:07, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

text: Yes. I think this is acceptable. --Bduke  (Discussion) 21:02, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

text: A bot removed the tag as this has been up a month-how do we ask an admin to close?--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 14:50, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

text: I put in a request on February 12 at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Requests_for_closure#Talk:Bronze_Wolf_Award.23Request_for_comment_on_whether_the_Bronze_Wolf_Award_by_itself_is_enough_to_show_notability_of_holders_of_the_award for a non-involved editor to close this formally.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 14:43, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Is it fair to count this comment, as the last agreed-upon version was come to four weeks ago, the RfD removed by a bot and brought to WP:AN for closure three weeks ago? I submit it's too late and not fair to the participants who came to agreement.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 07:43, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Bronze Wolf Award notability statement

message: *Comment -- I am a bit late to the game, but I'd like to comment. I do not agree with the sentence: "Where sources are mostly pedestrian and on the borderline of satisfying GNG, this award is enough to justify an article. It may be enough to reject a CSD, but not to keep an article if brought to AfD, for example. An award as such does not confer notability; only RS coverage, that may be triggered by such an award, does. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:43, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Is it fair to count this comment, as the last agreed-upon version was come to four weeks ago, the RfD removed by a bot and brought to WP:AN for closure three weeks ago? I submit it's too late and not fair to the participants who came to agreement.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 07:43, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Three weeks late...