Talk:Camp Fire (organization)

Scouting High‑importance

	Scouting portal Camp Fire (organization) 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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Organizations Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Guild of Copy Editors

This article was copy edited by a member of the Guild of Copy Editors.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles

Archives

1

Camp Fire discussion

Hello evrik, I hoped to bring this discussion to your talk page versus the Camp Fire edit logs to discuss "co-ed". My standing is that the website does not say anything about "co-ed", while it does reference the article discussing its diversity in the section "Inclusion and Diversity" on the home page if you click the "outspoken" link. This is the closest you can get to saying that it is gender-inclusive if not on the President says it is, but the website directly references this article from its diversity section. Let me know if you have any questions. Best, BeeTheBestThatYouCanBEE (talk) 16:06, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Let me quote the website, ""A Long History of Helping Youth Thrive". Camp Fire. Retrieved 2016-06-11. While Camp Fire was America's first multiracial, multicultural, and nonsectarian organization for girls, we became co-ed in 1975." I have no problem with "gender-inclusive," but co-ed is appropriate. --evrik ^(talk) 17:43, 30 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Co-ed implies (in fact, factually means) male and female. The newer source written by the president of the organization herself stated that it does not adhere to binary genders, so co-ed is not appropriate. BeeTheBestThatYouCanBEE (talk) 18:08, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The piece you reference is an op-ed piece. I am using the language from the organization itself. --evrik ^(talk) 12:45, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

evrik and BeeTheBestThatYouCanBEE, If it helps, I found a reference in an official statement on their website saying that they aren't just co-ed anymore. To quote the website, Yes we became co-ed in the 70’s, but today we’re proudly gender-inclusive. CowsAreFlatulent (talk) 14:18, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Co-ed and gender inclusive are not exclusive. --evrik ^(talk) 22:29, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

They are. Co-ed means two genders, and the organization claims that it is gender inclusive and not exclusive to binary genders.There is no reason why you should keep reverting back to your edit. I have presented the argument here, and can back it up with much better sources than you can. BeeTheBestThatYouCanBEE (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:37, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]