Proposal talk:Scout Camp

Two questions regarding the revised proposal:

• Scout camps, as indicated, are different from normal camp sites, how is this difference represented?
• What is the difference between amenity=camp and amenity=camp_site?

(If amenity=camp is to be used for scout camps, why not just call it scout_camp?) Freek 18:11, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, as a long-serving ex-Scout I feel rather mean about voting against this one but:

• I also can't see where Scouts come into it.
• I also can't see the difference between amenity=camp and amenity=camp_site
• I think it reasonable to switch from tourism= but that should be done en masse for caravan_site, hotel, motel, guest_house.

MikeCollinson 19:03, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

I also have a couple of comments/questions.

• We have many similar venues here (Australia). Most of them are not actually camps - but rather cabins or dormitories, and associated with halls, sports gymnasiums, swimming pools etc. A camping area may be included, or not. Are these included in this proposal?
• Would this be the difference between a camp and a camp_site?
• Also, I would prefer a more inclusive name. Of the last 6 of these I have visited, only one was associated with the Scouts. One was Girl Guides, two were run by the state government, one by the YMCA and one was a church organisation. Maybe Youth_Camp?

DancingFool 23:18, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Why not using the normal camp-site tag along with operator=WOSM (or whoever) and access=private?

+1, seems sensible to me MikeCollinson 12:27, 26 November 2007 (UTC)