Talk:Gang Show

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

What is a Gang Show?[edit]

This article tells about some gang shows that have taken place, but completely fails to tell what a gang show actually is. "an amateur variety show generally of a high standard and where the cast is made up of Scouts and Guides." just isn't enough information to give a clear picture (or any picture at all, really) of what exactly it is. (Note: This comment isn't just for the sake of argument - I really have no idea what one is.) --Tim4christ17 05:32, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

<irony> Do you mean we have to explain what Scouting (and its constituent activities) are all about? Can't we just assume that everybody knows that what we are on about is the greatest set of activities ever devised for young people? Are you serious that, just possibly, we have to explain ourselves? Albatross2147 06:27, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, to be honest, its actualy hard to explain what a gang show is. Its sort of Like Trying to Explain what Red is to a blind person - You can give them a technical description, tell them about light refraction and reflection, how you percive colours, and all the other scientific aspects of the Colour red till you are blue in the face, so to speak, but you still wouldn't have explained what red Is. The best we really can do is explain what it is like, and provide as much inner detail as possible, and let you draw your own conclusions, because we can't really explain to you what a Gang Show IS unless you've experienced it for yourself - either seeing a show, or Being in one. Trust me, I've been trying to explain for 10 years to people What the Brisbane Gang show is, and I've not once found a way that didn't leave people going "But what IS It?" (Churba 03:58, 17 July 2006 (EST))

It's true, it's extremely hard to give a satisfying definition of Gang Show. People only really get it once they've experienced it Dac 04:38, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Scouting[edit]

A "see also" link on Scouting to this article was deleted as being country specific. Is the Gang Show wider than the few countries mentioned - UK, NZ and Oz? If so, it should reflect that and then a link to the main artice might be justified. If it is limited to a few countries, it should not be linked there. --Bduke 07:23, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

History, organisation, format...[edit]

These three sections are all a bit mixed up at the moment, and this makes things confusing... I'll see what I can do if I have the time, but I'm a little preoccupied - if anyone else can see to it, that would be great... Horus Kol Talk 16:18, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge[edit]

Otago Gang Show doesn't seem notable on its own; however it should be mentioned in this article. --jergen 18:24, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • support merge per nom. Chris 21:14, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • merge Rlevse 21:59, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • support merge per jergen's arguments. --Bduke 22:30, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • support merge - no references :: maelgwntalk 23:34, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have completed the merge, adding some material to the Otago section of the article. --Bduke 10:43, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Requested Split[edit]

Anyone else think this section is getting far too long? It's essentially inviting a summary of every Gang Show in the world and that's just making things cluttered. I have no issues with keeping all the external links, but for this section I think we may need to condense it. Your thoughts? Dac 22:17, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Further to this point I think it's necessary to consider a split article, because it is much too long to simply remain a part of this article. The proposal is to split the Gang Shows Around The World section off into its own article. Your thoughts? Dac 00:55, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~

  • oppose There is not enough material here to justify a split yet. You will get more exposure on this if you announce it at WP:SCOUT --Gadget850 ( Ed) 12:24, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • oppose Per gadget and too much of this content is unreferenceable, should be trimmed and referenced to address issues. :: maelgwn - talk 12:35, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • oppose, for reasons above. Chris 23:30, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, then I'll condense it all. Most of the material is not needed so I'll cut it down to a name, location and how long it's been around. Dac 09:02, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That might be going a bit too far and more than this discussion has suggested. The main point is, in my opinion, to cut out advert-like material and general puffery. Each piece should concentrate on the essentials, which of course include name, location and how long it has been around, but there are in some cases other points to leave in. Many of the external links can be from the section itself, as many are now, rather then putting them in a separate "External links" section. --Bduke 12:20, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree—eliminating all of the text is not the way to go, we just end up with a laundry list. Show information should include year of start, notable people and events. Entries do not need every director, every song or skit and the like. External links should be made into proper references. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 14:02, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I'll work on it, and see how it goes. The laundry list may not be perfect but it's better for the moment that the insanely long list we had before. Dac 22:21, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Boston gs 1960 prog.jpg[edit]

Image:Boston gs 1960 prog.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 08:28, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gang Shows around the World - Australia[edit]

I beleive that Strzlecki Showtime should be removed from this list as it is not a Gang Show per se, or at least add Camberwell ST, Whitehorse ST and South Metro ST to the list to be fair.

Michaelkurtanjek (talk) 11:21, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the concept of the "Showtime" enables regional shows to exist, but do not compete for publicity with their local Gang Shows. The fun and benefits and structure of the shows would still be possible, within the Scout and Guide Movements, and others could participate in a similar setting to Gang Shows. StephenSmith (talk) 22:51, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge of Crest of a wave[edit]

It has been proposed that Crest of a wave be merged here. It has several problems which are mentioned at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scouting#Crest of a Wave, where the merge is also proposed and supported. Please continue the discussion here. --Bduke (Discussion) 01:19, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • support Agree with the previous comments. Article is very short and subject is not notable outside of the context of the gang show. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 01:21, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • support merge, and cleanup tense and tone, reads like a how-to. Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 00:43, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support good catch Bduke. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:45, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. No references, too short, largely subjective. Dac (talk) 02:54, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

United States[edit]

I have moved this from the artcile leaving just a staement that needs referencing of course. I am leaving htis here to assist those searching for a reference.

"Gang Shows were also produced in Pittsburgh and Chicago. Mr. Reader gave me a signed copy of "This is The Gang Show" during production of our Show in PIttsburgh. The book was written in 1957; so our show was maybe in 1958. We went to Chicago to see their show and Toronto to see theirs prior to the Pittsburgh production. Robert Harper, Mr. Blaskhurst and Mr. Witherspoon were responsible for our Troop 243 participation in the event. I still hear "Crest of a Wave" in my mind and soul."

--Bduke (Discussion) 00:51, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Original research tag[edit]

The reason I have tagged the article with the {{Original research}} header is because (as of that edit) there is no way to tell what content has been generated from the personal experiences of Scouting members participating in Gang Shows, and what content has been taken from reliable, published sources, but has not been referenced. -- saberwyn 04:04, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of Gangshows[edit]

I am not really sure that a list of Gangshows is really needed here, it could be split off or just deleted. It is unlikely (although possible) that many of them would be worthy of their own articles, so basically it is just a directory (see WP:NOT#DIR). I guess it is useful for people searching for information about gangshows but is not encyclopedia worthy. I know that they are an important part of the scouting experience but there will not be a large number of third party references to go along with this. I suspect the list is far from complete but it is just a hunch. -- maelgwn - talk 01:28, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am inclined to agree. After getting rid of lists of Troops/Groups/Units etc. on many articles, we are now replacing them, not just here, but in other places, with lists of Gang Shows. How best to proceed? I do not think that the largely IP editors who are adding this stuff will be reading this talk page. --Bduke (Discussion) 03:58, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, it may be worth just deleting it entirely...at the moment all it's doing is attracting more and more citation tags which will never get filled and it's hardly giving off sufficient information to warrant a list that size. Dac (talk) 07:05, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
While agreeing, I would comment that the citation tags are just looking for a source of the information. Those that are linked to the web page of the particular show, which gives the date it started and says it exists, are not tagged. If the citation had to show that the particular show was notable, i.e noted by reliable independent sources, then they would all fail on that criteria. It is not clear that lists of things have to be lists of notable things, but they probably should be. If that is clear policy then of course they should be deleted from this article and others, but there might be a case, for example, for listing Gang Shows in Scotland in Scouting in Scotland. That article does so list them with references to the Show's own web site, and many other articles do the same. A list of all shows in the world is quite another matter.--Bduke (Discussion) 07:50, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think many of the shows would get coverage in local newspapers and the like and this probably counts as a third party source but the coverage would be extremely limited. Gangshows in general would only be given much examination in some scouting publications, which are certainly not third party but do show some sort of notability. Finding reliable independent third party references would be close to impossible. I dont see the difference between a list here and a list in a country article? -- maelgwn - talk 04:15, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'd also support its removal... an incomplete and haphazard listing of Gang Shows does not add to understanding of the subject. -- saberwyn 10:04, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My comment would be that although maelgwn say there is local coverage in the media a lot of shows like to visit others further away and this site does give shows the opportunity to link to other show sites to find dates etc. I know I use the wiki for just such a reason and have visited shows as far apart as Bristol and Nottingham —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.160.208.8 (talk) 16:47, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

While the last more recent comment supports their retention, all the earlier comments support their removal. I agree that limited lists could appear in more local articles, so I will leave this for a few weeks so that editors can check whether those more local articles contain the Shows listed here. I will then delete the list unless convincing arguments are put forward. I also have a serious concern about the table of signature tunes. These really are not notable. I propose that the list be removed and the text reduced to the important items which seem to to be "Crest of a wave" and "Silver on the scarlet". --Bduke (Discussion) 08:24, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am working through the list to ensure that all shows are mentioned in a country/region or state article. When this is done I will remove the list and clean up the signature tune list as discussed above. --Bduke (Discussion) 23:10, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have now completed that task and have all the Gang Shows now listed on country or region articles. In UK i found that the region articles had some Gang Shows that were not on the main list. The situation with the few US entries is not clear. See the BSA talk page. I am going to draw attention on the Scouting Project to what is happening and then, after a while, I will delete the lists and tidy up this article. --Bduke (Discussion) 08:43, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have now made the changes.--Bduke (Discussion) 02:08, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Gang Show. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:25, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Gang Show. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:22, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Age of gang show performers[edit]

There is nothing in The Policy Organisation and Rules of the Scout Association which limits performers to under-25s. That decision seems to be made by the local commissioner based on his/her own views, wishes and philosophies. 2A00:23C6:5705:6701:5047:3F0F:760F:8726 (talk) 16:51, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The use of drag in early gang shows.[edit]

No mention is made of the fact in early gang shows - certainly in the UK - the girls & womens roles were played by male scouts in drag as this was pre 1976 when girls were finally allowed to join the scouts. Strangely though, I don't think the Girl Guides had a similar arrangement with boys! 2A00:23C6:3419:601:C4E9:CC48:6673:34E2 (talk) 20:20, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Gang_Show&oldid=1202205792"