Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Userboxes/Eagle Scout 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.ScoutingWikipedia:WikiProject ScoutingTemplate:WikiProject ScoutingScouting articles
Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Userboxes/Eagle Scout is part of WikiProject Userboxes. This means that the WikiProject has identified it as part of the userboxes system. WikiProject Userboxes itself is an attempt to improve, grow, and standardize Wikipedia's articles and templates related to the userbox system, used on many users' pages. We need all your help, so join in today!UserboxesWikipedia:WikiProject UserboxesTemplate:WikiProject UserboxesUserboxes articles
I like the image of the Eagle Scout rank badge, not the one of the real Eagle. We are Eagle Scouts after all, not Eagles. Rlevse17:50, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that the badge itself is fair use. Fair use rights allow the use of proprietary images to illustrate points, criticisms, etc. As a result, Wikipedia policy is to not allow fair use or licensed images to appear on User pages and the like, as there's no fair use context to put it in. Regardless, fair use rights themselves are slowly eroding - it's not worth the risk for Wikipedia.
I agree with you, though; however, we need a public domain image. I don't know what, if any, BSA-themed pictures out there are public domain, but it would be nice to find a replacement. By the way, check out Template:User fox for a long, messy argument about using the Firefox logo. I'm not inclined to follow the arguments all the way through at this moment, but it's certainly pertinent to our dilemma here. -Rebelguys219:01, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
