Talk:List of recipients of the Silver Buffalo Award

message: This is a list not an article, so I don't quite understand the application of  here.  According to the linked Wikipedia:WikiProject Laundromat, one of the goals is "To identify non-list articles that are overbalanced with laundry lists."  --Gadget850 ( Ed) 01:24, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: which is a more appropriate tag for a list page where the list is overly-exhaustive. Should I just nom this for AfD due to the main page on this award already containing a list of notable recipients? - superβεεcat  01:29, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: hmmm. How about a RfC to determine whether this is notable? - superβεεcat  01:36, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Laundry list 

message: This is a dispute as to whether an exhaustive list is necessary where the Silver Buffalo Award article already has a list of notable recipients. 01:45, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My response to the RFC: As the list is already available from a properly cited and authoritative external link reference, there is no need for Wikipedia to duplicate that list per the "not a list" guideline.  Wikipedia is an appropriate place to describe the notability of the award and refer to the list of recipients.  I recommend creation of a category tag for Silver Buffalo recipients, to be appended to the footer of articles about recipients.  That would be cleaner, easier to follow, and more maintainable than pasting the whole list into this article. VisitorTalk 09:08, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What is the "not a list"  guideline?  As noted above, :Category:Silver Buffalo awardees was deleted (without consensus).  Since we created the list, a number of biographies have been created based on it.  --Gadget850 ( Ed) 11:03, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for comment: Notability of this list 

message: I added the references column- other lists use this and it seems like a clean way to do this.  As we found out with the DESA reference on the Eagle Scout list, you can't use a name reference more than 337 time before the Cite.PHP module pukes.  I split the DESA refs into variant names, but that always seemed clunky.  I used the "*" style reference here for the common SB ref.  Is this a better solution?
Please add references that amplify the entry.  For example, FDR's article has no mention of Scouting.
--Gadget850 ( Ed) 20:23, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: THe ref I added to FDR does mention Scouting, but his article doesn't, so I'll add it to his article. He got the SBA before he became president too. I think the "*" solution is an excellent idea since it applies to everyone. I'd just leave the famous Eagles list the way it is.Rlevse 21:35, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: The link into the Boyce article is good for now, but I've been thinking we eventually need an actual article.  There are conflicting stories behind the story- the Rowan bio of West says one thing and the Petterchak bio of Boyce sys another.  --Gadget850 ( Ed) 17:51, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unknown Scout 

message: I did it as a table, but the consensus on List of Eagle Scouts (Boy Scouts of America) was to use bullets, as tables are harder for new editors.
:{discuss)
::Make it as close to Eagle list as possible, it is an FL after all. Unlink the red names and notate that they're there so that the list is complete, not just notable people.Rlevse 20:45, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Was that leave it as a table or convert to a list?  --Gadget850 ( Ed) 21:20, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Convert to a list, formatted like the Eagle Scout FL.Rlevse 21:32, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Table vs. bullet list

message: Keep as redlinks; remove redlink entries altogether (making it a notable list only) or delink and bold
:(discuss)
::See above.Rlevse 20:46, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Definitely list all recipients.  The complete list is an important reference and, as I've found many of the red links are notable, there's just no article yet.  I'll continue trying to create as many stubs for notable folks on the list possible.  --Jdurbach 12:53, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Redlinks

message: These cites need to be completely reworked.  As I am working through the list, the cites that have not been changed are marked with a "/" - we need to decide how to work the old cites.
:(discuss)
::Don't follow what you mean.Rlevse 20:46, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The unworked notability statements are copied directly from the BSA site, so we cannot leave those as is.  I have marked the unworked ones up through 1938 with a slash.  --Gadget850 ( Ed) 21:19, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good to know. --Jdurbach 12:54, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Notability