Talk:Adventist Youth Honors Answer Book/Regional

Is the reason for putting obsolete because we want to push for NAD requirements as priority? What should we put for examples like Table Tennis, Backpacking - Advanced and Volleyball? While these are not in the NAD, SAD and Ukraine and Interamerican all have their own versions of these honors. Which versions would we put as obsolete? Or is that only for when there is a GC or NAD version? --w126jep 13:54, 25 September 2014 (EDT)

I see this as a resource for the whole wide world. Many honors get piloted at Conf or Div level and are then adopted by SPD, NAD or GC etc, often with somewhat different more global requirements. Palms for example, created in Fiji, adopted by SPD, adopted by GC with modified requirements each time. These honors are interesting for a bunch of reasons. I might want to earn them, pilot them in another region, adopt them in another division etc and this wiki can help them become more accessible.

My thinking is that a regional honor is obsolete when it is adopted by a higher level that includes that region - so when NAD adopts Adventist Heritage after FL pilots the honor, the FL requirements go obsolete and the lower level likely stops producing the patch.

The other direction is that (mostly) SPD and (sometimes) NAD create Div specific requirements of a GC honor. This is just annoying but we do address some of these with disambig pages because they cover whole divisions, and we want to serve the whole world.

But when we have a local conf (not a Div) that creates a modified version of a long standing GC honor (backpacking), that is of little interest to the rest of the world. Why would I, in Canada, want to pursue Ukrainian backpacking when there is a GC honor for the same subject? At best the modified version might influence changes to the official requirements someday, which we would pickup. Maybe obsolete is not the best word for that? As far as I know the Ukraine is the only place with this situation and they already have their own wiki, so why would we bother with the regional variation?

Just the way I'm sorting stuff in my mind. There may be other ways of looking at this. JadeDragon 17:41, 25 September 2014 (EDT)

I understand your point of view and I mostly agree. But I'm not asking about that. Take for example Volleyball; Ukraine and SAD each have a version of this honor, yet it does not exist in the NAD or the GC. If we put up both versions of the requirements, should we put an obsolete tag on the lower-level version? Or should that tag be put only on lower-level versions if the requirements exist at GC level?

I also don't feel as if "obsolete" might be the appropriate word. It has a sense of destroyed or irrelevant. These honors have relevance to those in their respective conferences. Maybe something like "duplicate" or "has higher-level requirements". I'm not sure but I would prefer a different word.

I'm also thinking for those who are collectionists. There are many who just like the idea of having the different patches on their sash or collection and would like to be able to to complete the specific requirements for that regional honor. Just thinking aloud. --w126jep (talk) 18:01, 25 September 2014 (EDT)

Interesting points. In the vollyball example the two regions are not related, so two different honors, neither is obsolete. In the Adventist Heritage example I would think FL would be happy that an honor they pioneered got picked up by the NAD. If you don't like "obsolete" how about "adopted more widely". Interesting point about collectors. JadeDragon (talk) 19:47, 25 September 2014 (EDT)