Talk:Chi Tau/Archive 1
Latest comment: 5 years ago by Naraht in topic Alternate founding date???
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Chi Tau. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 |
Creation of this page, and moving former page content to Chi Tau (local) namespace
This original, older, larger and national Chi Tau organization was established in 1920, with almost a dozen chapters. It is highly unlikely to have any connection to the rogue local chapter called Chi Tau, founded in 1939, as the national group's remaining chapters were disbanded or went local in 1929. This leaves a ten year gap before formation of the Chico organization. As this larger group has precedence over the Chico local I moved the Chico local to a page that reflects its independent establishment. Wikilinks have been updated. Jax MN (talk) 21:50, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
Alternate founding date???
indicates a founding of 1919, rather than 1920 at Trinity. (Jax MN) Naraht (talk) 14:03, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
indicates 1921 (headache).Naraht (talk) 14:09, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
- After reviewing all of these, because Baird's lists a specific date rather than a year, I think that is the most solid source. Let's go with the 1920 date. Thanks amigo. Jax MN (talk) 18:27, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
- Expanding on this thought, I would defer to Baird's dates as reliant on the best sources and judge them to be the most consistently accurate. Writing 15 years after the demise of Chi Tau national, Sig Ep published a retrospective article on the chapter at Wake Forest. I infer that while the writer had access to more central-to-the-point information about the Wake Forest chapter's own origination, it would have been more reliant on heresay or rumor for dates and other notes on the demise of Chi Tau national. Hence, outside of the specifics of Wake Forest, I find the broader claims about Chi Tau in the article to be less valuable than what information we found in Baird's. Jax MN (talk) 17:37, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
- Sounds good.Naraht (talk) 18:50, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
- Expanding on this thought, I would defer to Baird's dates as reliant on the best sources and judge them to be the most consistently accurate. Writing 15 years after the demise of Chi Tau national, Sig Ep published a retrospective article on the chapter at Wake Forest. I infer that while the writer had access to more central-to-the-point information about the Wake Forest chapter's own origination, it would have been more reliant on heresay or rumor for dates and other notes on the demise of Chi Tau national. Hence, outside of the specifics of Wake Forest, I find the broader claims about Chi Tau in the article to be less valuable than what information we found in Baird's. Jax MN (talk) 17:37, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
Date format
Any particular reason for the 31 December 2010 date format? I tend to see December 31, 2010 more often.Naraht (talk) 11:40, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
- That style has been suggested to me as preferable for references here on Wiki. I don't particularly care either way, and was just trying to be consistent with others. If you have a strong preference, please adjust.Jax MN (talk) 16:43, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
- Not refering to references, referring to the actual article.Naraht (talk) 19:26, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
- I will change them in the main articles when I see them. I think the distinction is between US usage (month first) and European (date first). As I said, I don't really mind, as I think the European method may be more clear. I am more settled on other grammar issues, for example, I use Oxford commas, and still prefer two spaces after most periods. Heh. Jax MN (talk) 20:30, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
- You only put one space after the "Heh". On Fraternities that are American, I'd expect US Usage, no clue on the Philippines.Naraht (talk) 15:05, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
- I will change them in the main articles when I see them. I think the distinction is between US usage (month first) and European (date first). As I said, I don't really mind, as I think the European method may be more clear. I am more settled on other grammar issues, for example, I use Oxford commas, and still prefer two spaces after most periods. Heh. Jax MN (talk) 20:30, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
- Not refering to references, referring to the actual article.Naraht (talk) 19:26, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
Chi Tau Pin
Do we have any images of the pin that would be good enough to be here?Naraht (talk) 15:29, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
- The best I can find are here, or here. The image in my hard copy of Baird's is way too dark to resolve a good scan. The PAC-SAC image may be somewhat elongated in translation but I like its contrast. The Bohemian's is the correct proportion, I think. Jax MN (talk) 17:00, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
- Another good one, from the NC Chapel Hill yearbook. Jax MN (talk) 18:44, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
- Added the crest and infobox. Someone who is a better artist than me may want to clean up the image further, removing the grey around the pin. Jax MN (talk) 20:23, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
- Not sure pin goes in into the infobox, I think that should be crest. If we can find that...Naraht (talk) 12:04, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
- I couldn't find any other logo or crest. A couple of the yearbook entries had filler artwork where a crest might be, but these do not appear to be official. At this stage, dormant for eight decades, this pin may be the best we've got.Jax MN (talk) 17:03, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
- https://archive.org/details/chanticleerseria1924duke/page/264?q=%22Chi+tau%22+%22Trinity%22 The thing in the center on the left hand side. I've seen it elsewhere, but that's probably the largest image (even though it may be tough to clip)Naraht (talk) 13:33, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
- I see it - had previously thought it was filler. If an editor can extract and enhance, this may be a better choice than the pin, however, the pin is the identifier most commonly used in yearbooks for the chapters we have found. As a dormant group we don't have much to work from. Jax MN (talk) 15:48, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
- I'm not saying drop the pin, we'll put it elsewhere in the article. I asked over at the Graphical Workshop for help on this.Naraht (talk) 15:06, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
- I see it - had previously thought it was filler. If an editor can extract and enhance, this may be a better choice than the pin, however, the pin is the identifier most commonly used in yearbooks for the chapters we have found. As a dormant group we don't have much to work from. Jax MN (talk) 15:48, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
- https://archive.org/details/chanticleerseria1924duke/page/264?q=%22Chi+tau%22+%22Trinity%22 The thing in the center on the left hand side. I've seen it elsewhere, but that's probably the largest image (even though it may be tough to clip)Naraht (talk) 13:33, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
- I couldn't find any other logo or crest. A couple of the yearbook entries had filler artwork where a crest might be, but these do not appear to be official. At this stage, dormant for eight decades, this pin may be the best we've got.Jax MN (talk) 17:03, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
- Not sure pin goes in into the infobox, I think that should be crest. If we can find that...Naraht (talk) 12:04, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
- Added the crest and infobox. Someone who is a better artist than me may want to clean up the image further, removing the grey around the pin. Jax MN (talk) 20:23, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
- Another good one, from the NC Chapel Hill yearbook. Jax MN (talk) 18:44, 14 June 2019 (UTC)