Talk:Éclaireuses et Éclaireurs de France

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Éclaireuses et Éclaireurs de France is part of the Scouting WikiProject, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Scouting and Guiding on the Wikipedia. This includes but is not limited to boy and girl organizations, WAGGGS and WOSM organizations as well as those not so affiliated, country and region-specific topics, and anything else related to Scouting. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

	France Portal Éclaireuses et Éclaireurs de France is within the scope of WikiProject France, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.

[edit] Scout Promise

This section, "The EdF were one of the few Scouting associations who were allowed to use the Alternative Promise by Robert Baden-Powell. This led to grave turbulences in the 1950s[3] and finally to the introduction of a religious formula which may be used by the Scouts and Guides but is not an integral part of the Scout Promise." is extremely vague. Could someone describe the 'turbulences' and the 'religious formula'? What Promise do they actually use now? This is an important example of how Scouting in a secular context fitted in with Scouting in a religious context (Scout de France) and more details might assist people in an increasingly secular Europe. My French is not good enough to read the reference. --Bduke 23:27, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I'll try to write more on this - but this may take some days. --jergen 08:50, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, no hurry. I have been interested in this since the 1950s so I guess it can wait! --Bduke 09:01, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ig Nobel award

http://www.improbable.com/ig-pastwinners.html#ig1992 states:

ARCHEOLOGY

Eclaireurs de France, the Protestant youth group whose name means "those who show the way," fresh-scrubbed removers of grafitti, for erasing the ancient paintings from the walls of the Meyrieres Cave near the French village of Bruniquel.

I do not doubt that the Ig Nobel award in 1992 was given to a French Scouting organization or group, but the rationale on improbale.com is nearly completly wrong and it is unclear to which organization or group the award was given:

• In 1992, there was no Scouting organization in France under the name Éclaireurs de France. The organization changed its name to Éclaireuses et Éclaireurs de France in 1964.
• The EEdF is a laicist movement, not a Protestant as stated in the rationale.
• EEdf is not a single group, but an organization with 35,000 members and several hundred local groups.
• Eclaireur means scout and nothing else.
• The group did not erase ancient paintings, they damaged prehistoric paintings (see [1]). Thats several thousand years between ancient and prehistoric.
• The cave's name is not Meyrieres Cave but Cave of Mayrière supérieure.

The only reliable point on improbale.com is that this award was given to a group/organization for damaging a couple of prehistoric paintings. It is not sure to what organization (France has about 15 Scouting organizations using Éclaireurs as part of its name, half of them laicist, half of them Protestant) and it is also not sure if the award was given to a local group or the organization as a whole. --jergen 17:29, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't think there can be realistic doubt about this being the group to which the award was granted. That alone in my opinion merits mentioning it in the article. If you want to criticise the award, you are free to do so too (of course with sources for the criticism). Rather it seems to me (although I'd like to assume good faith) that you just want to remove this potentially embarrassing piece of information (given edit history, you removed it many times as "unsourced" even if the source probably was not that hard to find).

I also think you misunderstand the word 'ancient'. It means just "very old".

I tried to read the europreart.org site, but it's in a language I don't speak. See Wikipedia:Verifiability#Sources_in_languages_other_than_English.

Accordingly, I put the information back to the page. --SLi 02:22, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

To which of the following groups was the Ig Noble awarded (as there was no organization labelled "Eclaireurs de France" in 1992):

• Eclaireurs and Eclaireuses de France (laicist)
• Eclaireuses et Eclaireurs unionistes de France (Protestant)
• Eclaireuses et Eclaireurs israélites de France (Jewish)
• Éclaireurs Neutres de France (laicist)
• Fédération des Eclaireuses et Eclaireurs (laicist) with ten sub-associations using "Eclaireurs" as part of their name
• Eclaireurs évangéliques de France (Protestant)
• Eclaireurs neutres européens (laicist)

I severly doubt that the Ig Noble comitee mistook the "Eclaireurs and Eclaireuses de France" as Protestant and changed the label to "Eclaireurs de France". This would be two grave faults within one sentence.

I gave proof that improbable.com is (at least in this case) of questionable reliability (Name, religious affilation, facts of action). Wikipedia:Verifiability#Sources of questionable reliability states that these sources should not be used in articles other than about themselves. Futherone Wikipedia:Verifiability#Sources_in_languages_other_than_English does not state that non-English sources should not be use, it requests translations. These are the relevant sentences of [2]in a rough handmade translation.

• Quote 1: Figures: total number 2; 2 bisons is Paintings: absoulte number: 2; 2 bisons
• Quote 2: Les parois de la grotte sont couvertes de graffiti. Les bisons peints, peu lisibles, portent de nombreuses griffades de chauves-souris et des mutilations modernes, causées notamment par le nettoyage de la cavité (!). is The roofs of the caves are covered with graffiti. The painted bisons are badly readable and damaged by claw hacks of bats and modern mutilations, mainly caused by the cleaning of the caves (!).

I will remove the sentence again unless you can give proof that the organization mentioned is the same as described in the article. --jergen 09:00, 27 June 2007 (UTC)