Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Fraternities and Sororities/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Fraternity and sorority vandalism

I'm not a project member (I don't think this project is even alive anymore) but it would help out A LOT if people can watch over the fraternity and sorority articles and not just the respective groups they belong to. They are among the most vandalized pages in Wikipedia. Almost everyday I have to remove a vanity/non-notable addition in "Famous Alumni" sections as well as general trash talking. There's often sneaky vandalism and the problem is that if uncaught it can remain in the article for some time which happens quite a lot. I also can't tell you how many times someone has posted the secret mottos, handshakes etc. of many fraternities and sororities. Nearly half of all my contributions in Wiki now are reverting vandalism. A little help please? --† Ðy§ep§ion † ^{Speak your mind} 22:14, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

I know what you mean i have quite a few of the Greek Life articles on my watch list and even with the short amount of time i spend on wikipedia i never have a problem finding something to revert or remove on those articles. Also its a pity that it seems this project has died out. So much more work to be done...Trey 22:20, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

I pretty much watch over the NPC articles, though I know a few of you have caught what I haven't. Haven't had much time on wikipedia recently but usually I check over them every night at least. Agreed this project did somewhat die, a lot could be added to it. --ImmortalGoddezz 00:01, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Yeah you've got friends in the Greek Wikipedia world helping you out Dysepsion. There is just so much vandalisim that even if one person had just one article you still couldn't catch it all. But i'll make a note to keep a better eye on some of them. I've already went through and added some more IFC groups to my watchlist i'll work on some of the NPHCs also. btw if enough people are intrested in reviving this project i'll be happy to help work with it. Just throwing that out thereTrey 02:38, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

I try to watch over the articles ive worked on, however, sometimes the vandalism can be hard to spot. Any aricle i see with blant vandalism i correct as i can to best of my ability. Samwisep86 03:34, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks guys. The reason why I thought I'd mention it is because I've noticed that there has been an increase in vandalism in the past month. Maybe it's because of the new school year; I don't know. Hopefully it'll die down soon. But you are right Trey, it is difficult to catch them all and I became especially concerned when I caught two "sneaky vandalism" additions that were on two articles that were uncaught for several weeks and the fact that several anon users have become bold in actually trying to argue the addition of inappropriate content on articles. I'm also concerned in the way that it really doesn't bode very well among the Wikipedia community when there is constant vandalism on these articles. There's anti-Greek sentiment on here including several admins who don't even want these articles on Wiki. So it really doesn't portray fraternities and sororities in a positive light when people constantly mess with the articles. Glad I'm not alone! Also thanks ImmortalGoddezz. I've noticed even before this Phi Sigma Sigma revert war how you're watching over the NPC articles. Keep up the great work! =) --† Ðy§ep§ion † ^{Speak your mind} 05:47, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm currently watching Alpha Phi Omega, Gamma Sigma Sigma, Omega Phi Alpha, and a good number of the Philippines groups. For the Philippines groups it is tougher because I don't actually know what the facts are, but I'm trying. Naraht 15:52, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

The article for my fraternity, Sigma Alpha Kappa has recently come under attack from unregistered users and repeatly vandalized. I have been reverting everytime I see it, but iwould like some help from the proj. Add the article to your watchlist, and if you see any edit by a IP address, its prob vandalism and needs to be reverted back. ANy help would be greatly appreciated.--Samwisep86 22:48, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Is there any way to quickly watch all pages that have been taken into the project? That would help a lot. I ususally wind up watching every page I edit, but I haven't gotten around to even a sizable fraction of the total. (And, i've been gone for a long time!) -- vijay is now gogobera 03:24, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Umbrella Orgs.

Since this wikiproject is seeing renewed interests of sorts I thought I'd mention this. I don't know about you guys but I have a hard time keeping track each of the umbrella organizations, and the 'see also' with 4 different organizations listed distracts me. Anywho I was bold and created this Template:Greek Umbrella Organizations and inserted it into all of the umbrella organization pages, I hope nobody objects. If I'm missing one feel free to fiddle with it. --ImmortalGoddezz 23:11, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Copyright violations

I have had issues with the Beta Theta Pi article. User:Rrude seems to feel that "copyright" doesn't to him or his contributions. One of his reasons for this view was the standard "everyone else is doing it" defense. I noticed a comment elsewhere here about copyright violations on other articles about fraternities and sororities. I have put a source note reminding people about copyrights at the top of the Beta article. If anyone is still watching this project, I ask you to keep an eye out for copyright violations and appropriately remove them and warn their contributors. You can use Template:Cv, Template:Cv-n, Template:Cv-r, and Template:Cv3-n. Thanks.—WAvegetarian•(talk) 19:59, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

On the infobox template...

Perhaps the only reason I haven't joined this wikiproject is this.. (or switched over the NPC sororities). On this wikiproject's infobox it says 'fraternity type.' Some of the greek organizations that it's used on are not fraternities. (I know at the basis a female group of greeks can be classified as a fraternity, and some use that name, but most use the term sorority). I think quite honestly the fraternity can be removed just so that it says 'Type' on the infobox. Another thing is I think that a Jewel parameter should be included into it as well. I'm not saying this just for the sororities or the female fraternities, but several fraternities have official jewels as well, and if you're going to have the symbols, flowers, and colors why leave it out. My last point to bring up is this. Is there any particular reason that headquarters must be included in it? Wikipedia is not the white pages. Additionally when putting the infobox in some of the fraternities I haven't been able to find the headquarters and since headquarters is a required parameter it leaves an ugly white space filled with this ', , USA', I think this needs to be changed so it's not required. Anyway I decided to post this on the wikiproject talk page instead of the infobox talk page because I'm not sure how many actually watch that page, and figured it would get more exposure here. I would suggest just making a whole new sororotiy infobox but that seems like a waste of time as a few minor things need to be fixed on the old one in order to use it on those pages. Thanks --ImmortalGoddezz 16:54, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Hrm. I agree with most of your points. Jewel seems like a perfectly legit optional item, and there should be a host of other optional fields (bird, tree, etc). Sororities that don't consider themselves fraternities shouldn't be forced into using gender inclusive language. On the other hand, I think that headquarters information is important. When I want to learn everything about a fraternity, learning where there headquarters is and can be contacted would be very useful. Perhaps the "ugly whitespace" should just be left as motivation for any and all editors to find that info and add it! I also think that having a new sorority infobox is at cross purposes to the goals of this project, so I'm glad you brought up these points here! -- vijay is now gogobera 03:34, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

I've noticed the changes that were made to the infobox (in November), which I think are definitely helpful, but one of the reasons why I still haven't joined, and haven't changed the NPC sororities over is because it still says fraternity type. Anyway since nobody's taken initiative I'm just going to go in and change that so it says "Type" instead of "Fraternity type" and can be used inclusively in sororities and fraternities. I know people can nit-pick over the sorority/fraternity terminology but I'd rather just bypass that whole argument and make the template include sororities and fraternities rather than just fraternities. If you have a problem with that let me know, I just think it's easier to change the wording than to create a whole new infobox. --ImmortalGoddezz 01:25, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Fantastic. I agree wholeheartedly.  — gogobera (talk) 06:36, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Project directory

Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 21:26, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Sigma Sigma Sigma edit war coming? (help)

I already know that this is going to be a problem, and I want other people to back me up on this. A user User:Ms gwyn has taken Calli Cox off the Notable Alumnae list repetedly from the Sigma Sigma Sigma page. I have warned 2 times previously and then received 3 emails tonight. I will post them along with my singular response. I really do not want to get into an edit war with this person, nor do I want the added hastle of dealing with an organization so I would appreciate that some of you add this article to your watch list (which is the only thing I can think of to ask).

Email 1 Ms. Gwyn 2:20 a.m.

Hi,

I am a member of Tri Sigma, Calli Cox is not a Notable Member of my organization, I am not saying that she is not a member, but she is not notable. My organization and I am sure a lot of other organizations like me recognize that members can choose whatever career they wish, but that does not mean that we want certain job fields attachted to our organization.

I can get the higher ups in my organization to monitor this situation and make sure that name is no longer put in the Notable Member section, but I would rather not trouble them with this.

Thanks for the concern though.

Ms. Gwyn

Email 2 Ms. Gwyn 2:33 a.m.

Besides,

NONE of the other 2 NPC organization have any persons listed in their Notable Alumnae field, adult movie actresses, therefore, Tri Sigma shouldn't either. I am not naive enough to believe that other adult film actresses were not greek in college, because that would be stupid, but they are not recognized as notable, neither should Calli Cox.

Thank you

Email 3 Ms. Gwyn 2:34 a.m.

Like I said,

I will get the higher ups in my organization to stop that, I am just attempting to avoid that.

Thank you

Email 1 ImmortalGoddezz My response 3:20 a.m.

Ms. Gwyn,

Deleting a referenced notable alumnae from any page without rational stating on the talk page is vandalism. Please read over http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Vandalism "Vandalism is any addition, deletion, or change of content made in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia." Wikipedia is not about Sigma Sigma Sigma, wikipedia is a free encyclopedia not run by any organization and therefore does not represent any biased information regarding whatever organization it has an article on. Additionally wikipedia does not censor its information. I'm sorry you feel that way about Calli Cox, but she was a past member, and there are references to prove it, by removing a notable alumnae that has references that pass both the wikipedia policy for verifiability and reliable sources.

As for getting your organization involved please read over http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:OWN Sigma Sigma Sigma does not own, nor do you (and neither do I for that matter), the wikipedia page. Any information that can be verified as true can be included into the article.

As for the other NPC articles? Notable alumnae lists are never complete given the fact that people join and leave organizations, the others might not have adult porn stars in their listing because simply the porn star herself might not be notable enough yet. I'm sorry you feel this way about Callie Cox, but like I said before wikipedia is a free encyclopedia where information is not controlled by you or your organization and many editors contribute too, please remember that.

Thank you.

--Candice

I'm not sure this can be reported, but I wanted you all to be aware of the situation. Any comments on what I should do? Anyway thanks. --ImmortalGoddezz 07:26, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't know what 2 other NPC organizations she's referring to but the fact that Calli Cox has a Wiki entry that has not been deleted or contested proves that she is notable enough by Wiki's guidelines. Apparently there is a specific criteria to determine notablity for porn actors, something she clearly meets. It doesn't matter whether or not her organization thinks it's notable but whether or not other editors thinks she is. By stating "that does not mean that we want certain job fields attachted to our organization" clearly proves how biased her edits are. The editor is too new to Wikipedia to know the guidelines. There's absolutely nothing her "higher ups" can do. I'd say to keep reverting and if she continues, ask for a block or request for comment so outside editors can get involved. --† Ðy§ep§ion † ^{Speak your mind} 16:10, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Defunct Chapters

My questions/suggestions are geared specifically towards Alpha Sigma Phi but I am posting here for general feedback as I don't want to disrupt your efforts for article conformity. We list "Active chapters, colonies, and interest groups" but not all chapters including those that are defunct. I certainly understand what I assume to be the logic behind this - for brevity and because those chapters do not exist any more. But I have three main points on this subject which I'd like to argue.

1) Just because a chapter doesn't exist anymore should not be a valid reason by itself why it should not be mentioned in an article on that National Fraternity. It's part of the organization's history and Wikipedia isn't supposed to be about only current events. The Whig Party is an organization which doesn't exist anymore but they aren't ignored by Wikipedia.

2) Just because a chapter doesn't physically exist anymore doesn't mean that elements of those defunct chapters don't still persist. My chapter is defunct but we still have hundreds of alumni and we are still organized as alumni. Chapters may be for undergraduate students at colleges but you are part of your fraternity or sorority for life! Listing only active chapters is arbitrarily incomplete.

3) Quite frankly it makes no sense to me what so ever that you would list colonies and interest groups which have never actually been part of the organization, but you don't list chapters that legitimately were.

I'm not going to edit anything related to these questions until I get feedback but I am interested in your reactions. Thanks. Fife Club 18:28, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

A couple of thoughts here.

1) Space may be the fundamental issue here. While the standard for encyclopedic Fraternity articles on Wikipedia would appear to be Baird's Manual, the Baird's Manual entries for some Greek Letter Organizations (which include the inactives) would go well beyond the suggested 32KB limit. Alpha Phi Omega has about 700 charters of which 350 are active. There certainly is one inactive chapter mentioned in our entry, since our Alpha chapter is inactive.

2) The chapter list may be easily accessible elsewhere online, where professional staff are responsible for keeping the information up to date on a daily basis.

3) Some fraternities/sororities do have those in colonies as members of the organization the same way as pledges are members of the organization. They aren't brothers or sisters, but they are members. (and I think some fraternities do make members of colonies brothers at a certain point, but I am not sure).

My personal feelings are: If the overall list of charters (active and inactive) is short (under 50), go ahead and list them all on the page for the fraternity. If longer, consider a separate page. Naraht 13:07, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the input. I'm not in any hurry so I'll wait for possible counterpoints but I like your idea of a separate article for a complete 'historic' list of all chapters (active and inactive). Fife Club 15:52, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Going to agree with Naraht here. I’ve always been a fan of creating a separate list page for all chapters. Then you could list out chapters: active, inactive, and colonies, all on one page. And just have a link to it on the main article. Makes things look much nicer in my opinion.Trey 16:41, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Phi Kappa Sigma

The page as it currently stands is just word-for-word copying of copyrighted material from the pledge manual. If anyone has the energy to make an actual article out of it, that would be cool, because I don't. 198.138.40.146 08:06, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

I blanked Phi Kappa Sigma for copyright concerns. Could someone put up some original content, even something short, until we get something solid there? 198.138.40.153 06:25, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I put up an infobox, a brief descripition, and some things which could be quoted directly. If anyone else can please add to it that would be awesoe. Acidskater 13:09, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

More Articles for deletion and a request for a good directory?

• Sigma Alpha Mu has been brought up for deletion. The discussion is still ongoing, but the crux of it is that it's based on self-published sources. I've fought half the battle: I've found a dissertation showing the fraternity was founded in 1909, but nothing to establish that it's currently national in scope (other than a lot of colleges' fraternity directories). Does anybody know of a good source that is independent of the referenced fraternity(ies) that would have a directory of chapters? I've got a bad feeling we'll have to fight this battle again at some point, so it's probably good to have a source ready for deployment. —C.Fred (talk) 04:33, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing it up. That's by far one of the most poorly thought out if not ridiculous AfD nominations I've ever seen. --† Ðy§ep§ion † ^{Speak your mind} 04:59, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Template

I have proposed a template for the project to be used instead of the generic one. Please see here and discuss. Scoutersig 17:58, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia Day Awards

Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 23:02, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Greek Organizations Without a Page/archiving

I have seen many redlinks in lists of National Fraternities and Sororities which has bothered me somewhat. I have created two new pages, Phi Kappa Sigma and Sigma Tau Omega, which are both stubs and need to be expanded. I wanted to add the creation of National Greek Organizations without pages as one of the goals of the project. I really want to hear some input on this. Also, I tried to archive the discussion because it was way too long but the archives are too long themselves, so if you can fix this go ahead and do it. Acidskater 03:30, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Which nationals don't have a page?Samwisep86 06:11, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Just scroll through List of social fraternities and sororities and you'll see the redlinks. There aren't many but it isn't gonna be easy to do. Also, if your fraternity or sorority does not have a link to their website put it in. I put in a dozen or so but it would be nice to be able to have a link to each. Acidskater 06:20, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

External links to chapter websites in Chapter rolls

Hi there; a little content dispute we're having over at Triangle Fraternity highlights a good question. Should the listings in the Chapter roll have external links leading to the chapters' websites, or is it a violation of WP:EL? --Elipongo ^{(Talk|contribs)} 18:58, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I would say that it DOES violate policy. A single link to a general fraternity page listing chapter websites should more than suffice. If no such page exists for a fraternity, email them to find out why not. —ScouterSig 20:05, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Rating Scale question

Although I am partial, I would argue that Alpha Gamma Rho (and maybe even FarmHouse, though I am not a big fan of course) should also be more important, as I know that Alpha Gamma Rho may only have a chapter at Land Grant institutions, or colleges with an Ag. School. Because Alpha Gamma Rho has 72 chapters, with the much smaller percentage of college being ag. schools, this shows they are well known in the ag. community. They are also one of the few fraternities (unlike FarmHouse) that is social-professional, with emphasis on men coming from rural backgrounds, studying agriculture, or showing interest in agriculture. I would argue for them being more important. Sjostrom 19:51, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

• Ok so i've been out tagging some article and i have a question about the importance scale right now i am rating all fraternities and Sororites with less than 100 chapters as Mid as per the example given in the system. Is this ok? Becuase some notable groups fall into this catagory. just wondering if there were any thoughts on this.Trey 00:44, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree that some groups are quite well known. Personally i feel that if the group is a national group with more than 30 or so chapters or chapters in 25 or more states it probably warrents a High rating. Thats just me though. Its really not a huge deal most of the pages are created and maintianed by members anyways so in their minds the group is of Hig importance no matter what the tag box says on the talk page.Trey 20:14, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Trey, if a Fraternity or Sorority has at least 30 chapters or is present in at least 25 states they should have a ranking of High. If they do neet meet one of these then they should be given a rating of mid. Acidskater 00:00, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree and will make it so; also/another way of looking at it: if a group is a member of a national conference such as NIC, then they should be classified as "High."—ScouterSig 07:34, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. Sjostrom 06:17, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Another question

Many fraternities and sororities have public histories and what not, but after a certain point, things become ritual and secret. I would like to know what information would be necessary for a top rating that actually is respectful to the various organizations and their privacy? I would be more than happy to fill in information, if I knew what else was desired. Liz 06:45, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

For good or ill, the standard answer to questions like this is to look at Baird's Manual of American College Fraternities. If it is there or on the National website for the Fraternity, it should be OK to post. Please work from the Newest version of Baird's if possible.

In general for information, at the beginning, take what Baird's has, update at equal level from the Web page for the Sorority and put it into Wikipedia format. Use the template for the headquarters location, colors, flower, etc., make sure there is a link to the National website, but try to avoid links for the individual chapters, especially if the National website has one. Alpha Phi Alpha was a Featured Article, so as long as you are somewhere between the start and that, you should be OK. Naraht 13:57, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Alphabetical Order Proposal

We can have both Greek Letter Alphabetical *and* English Alphabetical if we use a sort table like the one for water area in List of U.S. states by area, Greek Letters will make up the first column, Spelled out greek letters (or english non-greek name like Farmhouse, the second and nicknames the third. I'd like to do this, any comments? Naraht 13:34, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

That's pretty neat, I didn't know you could do that. You've got my vote to do it. —Elipongo ^{(Talk|contribs)} 20:51, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

cfd

There have been a lot of cfds lately on fraternity/sorority members. Please go and make comments on it to keep them as they are important for navigation within the greek community. There have been multiple attemps before on the Sigma Chi category as I am sure there have been with others, so Im not quite sure if it is legit to renominate for cfd when a keep consensus was reached. Acidskater 06:33, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Kappa Alpha Society Rating

Recently I changed the Kappa Alpha Society rating from Top to Mid. My rationale goes along with the Chart created for ratings. Matthew Cadrin claims that it should keep a rating of Top because "the fact that without KA there would be no Greek system as we know it." First off I have never heard this claim before and secondly even if this were so that would only recieve it a rating of High. Instead of creating a huge argument between myself and Matthew Cadrin and I figured I would ask for the opinions of others within the project on what they thought of the rating as well. The discussion is at Talk:Kappa Alpha Society. Acidskater 17:20, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Phi Psi Controversy

On Phi Kappa Psi's talk page, there has been a debate among myself, User:Rjproie, and User:SlamDiego. Please review the debate and comment on it. because of some coindcidenal edit thats occured between RJ and myself, SlamDiego has decided I am operating a sockpuppet in the form of RJ. Please comment, I looking for a way to vindicate myself.Samwisep86 20:16, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Iota Nu Delta

The picture of Iota Nu Delta's founding fathers on the Iota Nu Delta page has been listed for deletion citing vanity. The uploader and I have had issues since they were copying word for word the iota nu delta website, come to find out the fraternity appointed him to work on the wiki and gave wiki written verification that the information can be used, etc. etc. Anyway he also uploaded this photo, I really don't have the time to go looking up a source for this, but if any of you can help out please do. Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion/2007 April 29#Image:Indnff.jpg --ImmortalGoddezz 21:47, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Eclectic Society, Phi Nu Theta

Could someone add the template stuff to this article? The article could also use some new eyes looking at it.

There si a book being published on the history fo this society in May, 2007, and there will probably be some visibility for this article coming up soon.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.133.124.199 (talk • contribs) 04:52, May 5, 2007 (UTC)

• This is the link: Eclectic Society (Fraternity). —ScouterSig 17:09, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Purpose Discussion

Request for participation and feedback on a discussion relating to the service vs. social status of greek-lettered organizations. The conversation is taking place on the NPHC talk page. I'm looking for contributions in the matter of how do we classify the type of GLO (service, social, professional, etc.) The current subject of the debate is whether or not due to Title IX restrictions, how do GLO's get classified. Justinm1978 03:40, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Tau Delta Phi

I just created this article, but I don't know anything about the organization (and I am working to improve Alpha Kappa Alpha). Can someone try to help expand the article? Thanks! Real96 08:36, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Alpha Kappa Alpha

Can someone give me any suggestions or feedback into the article. I have been improving it significantly and I know that it is not a GA-class, yet I need some feedback. It was previously start-class. Real96 07:27, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I glanced over it. Looks like you're doing an excellent job. In my preliminary opinion, I think it could be rated a B class article now. The same goes with Delta Sigma Theta.Samwisep86 09:03, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Right now, I am focusing on one article. I will eventually get to the Deltas, b/c I have their history book. Also, the Deltas are rated already B-Class, but there are some verification issues. However, I don't want to rate it due to conflict of interest. Also, do citations go in front of the period or after the period? Real96 10:33, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Citations go right after the period with no space at all, like this. Acidskater 14:02, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

(reduce indent) Okay, I fixed this, thank you! Real96 14:59, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Per consensus, I am rating the article B-class. I will keep you updated for further developments. :-) Real96 13:09, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Can someone give me a quick peer review of this article and tell me if it has been reached to GA status as of yet? Thanks. Real96 18:53, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Having taken a fraternal article from b-class to GA status, here is what I've noticed in the article that i have either removed or shortened in Beta Upsilon Chi. Beta Upsilon Chi had many similar issues. The sections: Founders and Executive Directors, International Presidents, and The Boulè, all have way too much information to be encyclopedic, and what you do chose to stay ( I think the founders and executive directors part does have some valuable information, should be mentioned in sentence form and does not require a table. I do like the Regions section, even though I could see how others question it's value. (note, the bulleted list here too should probably be changed) Also, there seems to be WAY TOO MUCH information in the National programs section. If you want to look at what the GA reviewer wanted changed to the Beta Upsilon Chi article, please visit the discussion page. Keylay31^hablame 08:28, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

I am basing the GA scale off of the general assessment scale. And, I am also comparing the article to Alpha Phi Alpha which has much more information than AKA. My overall goal is to make this article a FA. All I have to do is expand the history a little bit, add two or three more sections concerning the Community Service/National Programs. I do agree that the table with the founders and the Executive Directors need to be deleted, because they will be covered in the founding. Also, I need to add a hazing section to this article. Thanks a lot for the assessment because I didn't know how this was going at first. I have also added some images to commons as well. Real96 12:36, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Banner for Qxz Ads

Do you guys have any suggestions for our banner for Qxz's ads? I am going to make one soon. Thanks. Real96 16:32, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

- here it is. Real96 20:55, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Looks AMAZING. Great job. Keylay31^hablame 22:47, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

nice!!!!!!!!Eljohnson15 06:11, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Real96 18:49, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Change of List names

I don't know if any of you noticed but Honbicot changed the article name of Lists of Notable members to list of members (such as List of Sigma Chi members, List of Phi Beta Sigma members, and others). I do not agree with this one bit as these lists are lists of NOTABLE members, not just members (they should be List of Notable Sigma Chi members, List of Notable Phi Beta Sigma members, etc.). If anyone has a source for the reason for this change please let me know. I have asked Honbicot to tell me what policy he used to change the names. If I don't find any policy for this change I am changing it back. If anyone does know if there is a reason for this change please let me know. Acidskater 18:20, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

I'd say revert the changes, as nowhere in the Manual of Style he quotes in his response to you does it say that "notable" is not to be used, it's just his POV. If there is reason to change it back, then it should be put to a vote as those lists fall under this WikiProject. He's not an admin, so there is no real justification for his opinion overriding that of the project. Justinm1978 14:19, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

I just did the name change from List of Sigma Chi members to Notable Sigma Chi Alumni. The only problem is I think I did it wrong because the history for the page is wierd. If anyone knows how to do this, please do it. Acidskater 14:30, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

That's because you did a "cut and paste" move instead of using the "move" tab at the top of the page. We're going to have to get an admin to fix it per Help:Moving a page#Fixing cut and paste moves—Elipongo (Talk|contribs) 16:18, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I've posted a repair request. Don't freak out when you see the speedy deletion at the top of the page because that's the procedure outlined for repair. —Elipongo (Talk|contribs) 16:30, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the help. Acidskater 20:10, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Honbicot (talk · contribs) is right about the capitlization conventions anyway. I've moved the page to Notable Sigma Chi alumni. —Elipongo (Talk|contribs) 19:07, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Upon some further though, something like List of notable Sigma Chi alumni would probably be the most appropriate name for that article and for similar articles- they are indeed lists after all. Any other opinions on this? —Elipongo (Talk|contribs) 19:20, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I would agree with the "List of..." designation. Perhaps to address Honbicot's issue, a descriptive word/s ("notable," "famous," "Selected list of...") should be chosen to add to ALL the similar articles. —ScouterSig 01:01, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

youngest founder

I am currently putting information on Sigma Chi founders and became interested about the youngest founder. James Parks Caldwell was 14 when Sigma Chi was founded and I think that makes him the youngest founder of any fraternal organization. If anyone knows someone younger who was a founder of a fraternity list them. Acidskater 15:49, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

well probably at the college level but that dosnt make him the youngest of ANY FRATERNAL ORGANIZATion since there are high School frats out there. But he is probably the youngest in the college level frats.Eljohnson15 18:18, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

It might be true, but watch out for original research. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gogobera (talk • contribs) 14:23, August 27, 2007 (UTC)

Categories

We have 10 sub-categories of Category:Fraternities and sororities; which is all good to me. However, it is clearly lacking as not all groups are members of a National Council or Conference. How should they be categorized? I was thinking Category:Independent fraternities and sororities, but that makes it sound as if the others do not have any mind of their own. The term "unaffiliated" doesn't seem to fit, either, as Greeks tend to identify themselves as "affiliated" with their own organization, and could be miscontrued easily. Suggestions?? —ScouterSig 00:18, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

• I think perhaps you might be reading a little too much into this but if you are i'm sure others will too so it must be addressed. I personally have no problem with either although i lean towards "Unaffiliated" if someone is to misconstrue something i think they would have a hard time with unaffiliated. My question is which national sororities and fraternities are unaffiliated with a national group? Could they perhaps be placed in another existing category?Trey 03:31, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Beta Sigma Phi

Beta Sigma Phi has recently been edited extensively by a registered user and an IP, probably the same person. I've added both an unreferenced tag and a tone tag because the content that's been added sounds like it's been copied from elsewhere (I haven't checked to see if it has though). In anycase I've started to warn the user/IP but the tags have been removed 4 times now so if anybody could just add this to their watch page I would appreciate it. Thanks. --ImmortalGoddezz 01:44, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Alpha Phi Alpha - Service Fraternity or Social Fraternity

Stemming from a discussion on the NPHC Talk Page, there is a vote taking place on the Alpha Phi Alpha talk page, regarding the legal classification of this fraternity. Please read over the cited material and vote so we can put this conversation to bed. Opinions of those outside of the current three people going back and forth (and are currently deadlocked) are highly needed. Justinm1978 16:17, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Lists

I think that it would be helpful to create list pages for notable alumni and chapters of greek organizations. Before we begin on a mass scale I think it would be best to figure out which lists to do this for. It would be pointless to make a page of notable alumni when there are only 10 in the list. I think that if there are 30 or more(chapters or alumni) there should be a page for it. Any less should not unless there is more to add than just the list. Please list any other suggestions. Acidskater 05:22, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

I would agree. And as for alumni pages, there should be alumni listed in at least three 'major' categories (entertainment, government, miliatary, athletics, academics, etc); otherwise, it's just a list of "actor alumni," etc.

This exists for many organizations. There are currently a number of movements to make these more uniform or to take these lists off or organization main pages and make separate list pages of them.Corsulian 20:36, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

List of collegiate secret societies

Please provide sources. I have deleted all entries that do not have Wikipedia articles, and therefore no sources to indicate that they even exist, let alone that they are notable. Corvus cornix 23:27, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

User:Justinm1978 claims that I am "disrupting" your WikiProject by requiring sources for unsourced claims on the article. Am I disrupting your project by requiring you to follow the inviolate policies of Wikipedia? Corvus cornix 21:42, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

I see it as disruptive when blanket deletions are applied without so much as a care to the original work that may have gone into it, assuming good faith. After the deletion was reverted by multiple users, a simple "hey, you better find something to back this up then on this or it's gone in a week" would have been sufficient, as your interpretation of WP:V has been called suspect by many contributors to that article and discussion that ensused because of your lack of warning. Justinm1978 00:28, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

"Original" work is right. As in Original research. My "interpretation" is that you have to provide reliable sources to prove your claims, which you and the one anon who wants to keep putting the red links back keep wanting to do. I keep asking for sources, I get personal attacks. Put up or shut up. Corvus cornix 02:44, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

The above is typical of the kind of discussions the List of collegiate secret societies has in it's discussion pages. The Aarticles itself has a bare introduction and then a confused list of nonsense. I would almost recommend deleting the whole page, mostly because they don't have any guidelines or any plan for what the list is supposed to be about. What is a secret society? They don't know. They have no way of distinguishing between senior honorary or recognition societies, or initiatory clubs, or chaptered societies, or any of a dozen different types of organizations. The list is a mess. The second reason is the rank hostility of many of the posters. There was even a fight over tagging the article as confused. The page is garbage. Is there anyone in this project interested in straightening this mess out? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 129.133.124.194 (talk) 03:10, August 24, 2007 (UTC)

Talk:List_of_collegiate_secret_societies#Request_for_Comment

Please comment. Corvus cornix 23:38, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Request to include for Tau Gamma Phi article...thank you for your help...

International Vision Global Reach

Tau Gamma Phi—the Triskelion’s Grand Fraternity— is a social organization of higher education students in The Philippines, founded on a similar model to the fraternities of the United States and Canada.

The organization, originally known as the "Order of the U.P. Triskelions", was founded on October 4, 1968 by four Arts and Science students from the University of the Philippines, in the Diliman campus, Quezon City, Philippines. The group swelled in ranks and gained its recognition when the Greek-lettered name Tau Gamma Phi was adopted. A few years later, chapters from other college and university campuses in the Philippines were established.

The Tau Gamma Phi aims for the promotion and achievement of the ideals of fraternal brotherhood. The fraternity believes that it must forge its members to embody qualities of leadership, commitment, persistence, trust, integrity, respect, and vision. This fraternity aims for academic success, personal, career and spiritual growth, active participation in the community through service and social activities. The Tau Gamma Phi is committed to developing a best-in-class brotherhood organization: a student organization that embodies its own ideals and mission in accordance to fraternity’s Tenets and Code of Conduct.

A member of Tau Gamma Phi is called a Triskelion. Triskelion is a "Three Legged Symbol" as shown on the fraternity seal, (also used as a symbol of Brittany, Sicily and the Isle of Man) though its origin is a mystery. A Triskelion has always lived up to the motto, "it will stand no matter where you throw it", which accompanies its seal — Strength, Free Will and Brotherhood.

The turbulent 60’s was a decade of social and political upheavals in the annals of Philippine History. The period saw the breakdown of traditional beliefs and long-held values in favor of newer and more progressive ideas. In almost every aspect of Philippine life and culture, CHANGE seemed to be the rightful order of the day.

The Fraternity system in the University of the Philippines was immune from these external developments. As extraordinary times, called for and breed extraordinary men. 1968 saw the wielding together of 25 concerned student leaders with a vision of introducing change and reforms in the feudal and decadent nature of the existing Fraternity System. Then the result was the creation on October 4 of the same year of the UP Triskelions’ Grand Fraternity, better known as Tau Gamma Phi.

Through the years, the Tau Gamma Phi has never strayed from it’s goals, and although the cause of which it has chosen to champion has proven to be difficult and sometimes, seemingly hopeless, the Fraternity has, nevertheless survived and even increased a thousand-fold in strength and in number, knowing fully well that peace is a product of strength and not of weakness, where other fraternities with the same noble intentions failed to succumbed into non-existence by adopting a passive resistance to fraternity violence; the Tau Gamma Phi has chosen not to follow the same path lest it suffers the same fate.

Furthermore, as a manifestation of its sincerity towards the achievement of such goal, the Fraternity has taken an active role in organizing inter-fraternity alliances in the various schools and universities all over the country in the hope that such alliances will provide the conducive atmosphere where fraternities can slowly grow and mature together in a fellowship of mutual trust and respect in each other’s philosophies and ideals. "De gustibus non desputandum est - of likes and dislikes there should be no disputing, live and let live", this is one of the guiding principles of the Triskelions.

Today, the Tau Gamma Phi is already one of the biggest, most cohesive, and most dynamic fraternities in the Philippines. It boast of membership of every colleges and universities around the country, and now in all regions of the United States of America and other continents of the world; and true to its objective of changing the elitist orientation of the fraternity system, the Fraternity had decided to open its door to out-of-school youth (TYM/Triskelion Youth Movement) so that they, who were not privileged of education, may also share in the fruits and the glory of the Tau Gamma Phi. With the participation of the Triskelion Youth Movement (TYM), the fraternity has evolved to become a social organization with a strong objective to reach out to all sectors of the society especially those who are in difficult situations such as typhoons, floods, fires, and other calamities that affects the well being of every individual.

To date, the fraternity has thousands of resident and alumni members from every college and university in the Philippines. Professional Triskelions are actively involved in their respective fields of interests such as Triskelion Order of Law (TOL) for Law Students, Triskelion Order of Medicine (TOM) for medical practitioners, Triskelion Order of Business (TOB) for corporate leaders, businessmen and entrepreneurs, and the Triskelion Law Enforcement Group (TriLEG) for Law Enforcers.

At present, International Chapters, Councils and Coordinating Bodies are activated namely: Triskelion International (TI) and Triskelion Alumni Organizations (TAO) of the Middle East Region, Europe and Asia and Triskelion Global Coordinating Council (TGCC) of the Philippines and the Triskelion Grand Foundation (TGF) of Northern America whose main goal is to uplift the well being of the Supreme Fraternity and Bagong Tao Movement (BTM) a duly accredited party list organization for a better Triskelion future. Tau Gamma Phi vision and mission to serve and excel in all fields of human endeavor. Thus, a way of life in accordance with the Tenets and the Triskelion Code of Conduct while empowering the principle: "Man is Brother unto Man".

References: http://www.triskelionuae.i8.com/ http://taugammaphi1968.org/portal/index.php http://www.bagongtao.com/7101/13122.html http://thomasiantriskelion.org/tgp/home.php http://triskelion.blogsome.com/

If the text is copied from the website, then no, the article can not be included into the encyclopedia. However, if the organization is notable, it then can be included into the encyclopedia. Miranda 14:55, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Passed in General notability guideline through references.

Delta Sigma Theta Re-assessed as Start

I reassessed DST as a Start. See the this discussion. Miranda 17:00, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Affwan, Mal Amr?

Naraht and AphiO1925 are wile-wiki-users and belongs to a friendly mission fraternity. Why they are doing things in changing and reverting of shared ideas on discussion page of Tau Gamma Phi article?

Responded at the Tau Gamma Phi Discussion page.Naraht 12:41, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Kappa Alpha Psi

I have been editing the Kappa Alpha Psi and List of Kappa Alpha Psi members articles and keeping watch of them. I plan to add more things to kappa alpha psi but just haven't gotten around to it and was wondering if it deserves a higher rating then it has now? (Pop4any1 16:42, 23 July 2007 (UTC))

You can always put it up for good article review, but without more citations in general, and especially citations from third parties, I don't see it making the cut just yet. Of course, I'm not the judge of that and reviews are very fickle, in my experience :) I say give it a shot, see what they say, and improve from there. Justinm1978 17:45, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

I think that the link that Justin is referring to is this one. However, at this point, in my opinion, the article needs to stay a B, since there are a lack of verification of facts and some original research. Miranda 00:52, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Red Cup userbox

I see that the "red cup of unknown beverage" is still listed as the userbox. Is anybody actually really in favor of keeping that, or are most people using the more 'professional' userbox? If the latter, how about we just drop the red cup? I'm not really adamant about this, so if someone demands we keep it, that's ok...I'm just throwing out a suggestion. Justinm1978 17:49, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

It's "either/or". Some people prefer a professional userbox, rather than a non-professional one. Most wikiprojects have more than one userbox due to user's preferences. My userbox that I created is just a derivative of the official logo of the project. Miranda 00:25, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Kappa Alpha Order review

Could I get someone to re-evaluate the Kappa Alpha Order page - I have done a lot of work cleaning it up, and I would also like to see the importance raised, as KA is a NIC affiliated fraternity, with 128 active chapters, well above the 30 chapter threshold for high importance. Any advice on improvements would be appreciated as well. Jman1865 22:58, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

You could send it over for a peer review see WP:PR. I will go over and check it out though, and see if anything can be improved. Samwisep86 23:11, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Question about news infomation

Hello everyone - Thanks for your efforts on updating and creating information on Fraternities and Sororities. I am currently a volunteer for the National Panhellenic Conference and was browsing the pages today. I am also an Alpha Chi Omega and I just wondered why Alpha Chi was the only page that included news articles from over a decade ago? I see the stuff about Delta Zeta and can see why it is front and center because of the timeliness of the news story. I was just wondering if you will be adding other such information to all NPC member group pages. I agree that what happened at Colorado was a serious issue and should not be forgotten - I was just wondering about how this will apply to all groups. If you need any info about NPC let me know.

Thanks again, Jen Daurorj 18:31, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

As far as I can tell a member saw the DZ issue and questioned the necessity of it being on the Delta Zeta page. The response was basically 'if it can be sourced properly it can be included' after which the user added the Alpha Chi Omega information in on that page. I've been the one looking over the NPC sororities along with a few others and I add things as they become knowledgeable to me, other than that I'm not going to go digging for some minor event that was reported in a local newspaper about so and so chapter of so and so sorority. Besides it most likely wouldn't pass WP:RS. Out of the 26 Alpha Chi Omega, Delta Zeta and Kappa Kappa Gamma are the only ones that have had sections that can be called controversial. As for having old news articles, age doesn't matter as long as it's from a reliable source. --ImmortalGoddezz 20:37, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Alpha Kappa Alpha, an NPHC sorority, has a controversial section as well. It's included in the 1990s section of the history. Regardless, hazing is a very serious issue and an overview should be shown (if it occured) due to having a neutral point of view. Miranda 00:28, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

I appreciate the explanation and yes - I agree that hazing is serious. Thank you for explaining the criteria used. I guess you never know what the media will pick up on. I would never expect anyone to remove negative information about our group - we did it - no excuse. I was just not sure what the criteria was for posting as unfortunaly all of our groups have made bad decision or participated in acts, some very serious, that are not in accordance with our founding principles. Some have been more lucky than other to not be picked up by the media. Thanks again and good luck with the ongoing work of the project.Daurorj 20:22, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Frat and Service Organization Articles for Deletion

Ladies and gentlemen, we have three frat/sorority articles up for deletion.

• Chi Rho Omicron Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Epsilon Sigma Alpha
• Epsilon Sigma Alpha Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chi Rho Omicron
• Beta Upsilon Chi Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beta Upsilon Chi

If you have any opinions to share in this matter, you are welcome to express them there, although I would caution that AfD is NOT a vote. Regards, Alphachimp ^talk 23:14, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Another article

• Delta Epsilon Sigma Iota

Alphachimp ^talk 23:57, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Once again, sorry for belaboring the point, but AfD is not a vote. Quite frankly, it doesn't matter to me what you folks say. I just felt that some of you might want to know about these AfDs. Alphachimp ^talk 00:07, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

I see no need to delete the first three groups you have listed. All three can be quickly verified by a quick Google search. In particular the Beta Upsilon Chi being the largest Christian fraternity is most certainty significant. Chi Rho Omicron has 7 national chapters which I think also warrants a mention in Wikipedia. Finally ESA is admittedly a poorly written article but perhaps with some expansion and wickfying it could also be saved this could be easily done since as I said there is significant info available with a quick internet search. --Trey 02:49, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Response: Can anyone explain why Beta Upsilon Chi was nominated for deletion? I have done quite a bit of work recently on the article (mainly reorganizing it, taking out "useless" information, and adding references, but deletion? --Keylay31 05:36, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

• It was nominated becuase the article at the time was very underdeveloped. In addition many on wikipedia do not like greek life and random AFD's are common. However the result of the AFD was Keep and now the artcle looks much better thanks for all your work on itTrey 06:13, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

  Ditto. Thanks a lot for your work on the article. alphachimp 06:45, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Lambda Pi Upsilon was speedy deleted today because it was tagged as spam/advertising. I wrote the deletor asking why. If we get the article back, it needs to be re-written a bit better. Justinm1978 21:09, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Chi Rho Beta is largely pointless, but the existence of the organization demands that the article remain. I would definitely delete the "Evaluation" section as it appears to be rambling from someone of a questionable sobriety level.Corsulian 20:28, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Professional fraternity and honor society

Can anyone fine information outside of wikipedia about how to distinguish between a professional fraternity and an honor society? As far as I can find, it's totally a matter of preference in teh organization, and even then some chapters will use a name of their own designation; eg. a friend of mine refers to her "fraternity" AED, even though they cite themselves as an honor society. —ScouterSig 22:54, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

At the risk of proving myself wrong just by scrolling through the entirety of this page, I don't believe there's a true distinction between the two. Theoretically an honor fraternity recognizes achievement on a scholastic level while professional fraternities recognize a specific realm of education. These are not mutually exclusive, however. I don't know, off-hand, of any professional organizations that don't have entry requirements similar to an honors fraternity. I'm also not familiar with any honor fraternities (other than ones specifically for Greeks like Order of Omega) that aren't based on a particular field of study.Corsulian 20:34, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

F&S Logos need a Fair Use Guideline

FYI, all logos of f&s must have a fair use guideline in addition to {{logo}}. For an example of a rationale, go to FURG or to Image:AKAshield2.png. Miranda 00:52, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Lambda Chi Alpha

Lambda Chi Alpha has undergone a significant revision over the last few weeks. I would like imput from the members of this WikiProject. Any ideas that you have or commentary would be greatly appreciated. I hope to raise the article above start level.Airpear 04:27, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Proposed deletions (WP:PROD)

• 26 September 2007 - expires 1 October

Lambda Alpha Chi (via WP:PROD)

--User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 12:18, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Resolved

• The William Penn Society (via WP:PROD on 26 August 2007) Deleted

Notable alumnae

I'm bringing this up here because I haven't seen a general consensus for the alumni/alumnae.

Lately for the NPC sororities I've been going through and deleting all of the alumni that are red linked with the reasoning that if they're notable why do they have red links? I've also done this because I don't want to go through and try to find references for fifty people who are 'notable' yet don't have articles, and what merits notability into these lists anyway? So instead of picking and choosing 'oh hey this person's done a lot I'll leave her in' I've just cut everybody who doesn't have an article. I've also been taking out links that redirect to other pages (for example a contestant on Big Brother who doesn't have her own page). Those that are left over after that cut, I reference. I either pull the reference from that particular NPC's notable page, which isn't the best source but makes things quicker, or go out and try find references that pass WP:RS and WP:V. If I can't find references then I cut them too.

This seems to working well for the NPC's besides a few people trying to re-insert somebody they just 'know' is notable. If I do get major opposition from a person/IP who is bound determined to put somebody in there who they deem is notable it's not like I can say 'well we've reached consensus on how to handle this,' so I have no footing to stand on. My question is this is there any consensus for these lists? --ImmortalGoddezz 17:29, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm primary contributer to Notable Alpha Phi Omega members and I tend not to make links unless I know the person is actually already on wikipedia. I tend not to use whether or not the have a Wikipedia page as my determining factor but rather are there people who have similar levels of notability who are on Wikipedia pages. Since Alpha Phi Omega for its first 40 or so years was in many ways a scouting honorary, many university presidents agreed to be members. I consider someone who is a University President to be notable since a good number do have Wikipedia pages. Note, the large majority of these University presidents are people that I have direct sources for out of the National Fraternity magazine.Naraht 18:30, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm glad someone brought this up because this is something I’ve thought about as well. Here's my take on it. When I put together the list of Notable Phi Delta Theta Alumni, I was careful to include members who can be verified AND who already had wiki articles. My reasoning is that the list should be a compliment to the article of the fraternity. They should highlight the achievements of its members who are notable not the fraternity itself, yet I’ve noticed in the past couple of months that there has been a huge proliferation of additions especially to fraternity notable alumni lists with a great many of them having no articles. Notable almuni lists should be looked at with the mindset “this is a notable person who happens to be a member of this organization”. Probably the best example of this is that of the Freemasons: List of Freemasons. None of the names in this list are red-linked. In this case, the list serves as an illustration of notable Freemasons. But right now it seems people are including notable alumni to build up the article or info on the fraternity. Keep in mind though that a list says absolutely nothing about the fraternity itself other than it has notable members. The question at hand is: are they only notable because of their association with the fraternity? When I look at some of the lists, there is absolutely no way some of the redlinked names would even qualify for an article and in essence are only being included to build the image of the fraternity. In other words, they are pretty much being used as a recruitment brochure. I don’t know of any other type of lists on Wikipedia that have so many links to non-existant articles. I can see a few redlinks here and there on lists but some of the lists have way too much and the problem of notability and verifiability arises. Believe me when I say there are A LOT of notable alumni of many fraternities that do have Wikipedia pages but are not included in the notable alumni list. I was surprised that many notable alumni of Phi Delta Theta have articles and I didn’t even include many others that have articles. The list itself is already really long. I’m sure that the same thing can be said of other fraternities. I don’t think this issue will be resolved anytime soon but it’s worth exploring. ----Ðysepsion † ^{Speak your mind} 07:00, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree a lot with Dysepsion but there are a few instances, in my opinion, which do not follow wikipedia guidelines for notability to create an article. Most of these instances deal with alumni who are notable enough to be mentioned in an article but not notable enough to have an article. The most common of these is CEOs of companies. Sometimes an actor who has had a role which is notable but the actor doesn't have his own page. A great example of this is Sigma Chi alumnus Charlie Weber, who does not have his own page but a character of his, Ben (Buffyverse) does have a page. I view the matter as being much more lenient then the article notability guidelines but very closely linked. Acidskater 07:28, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

I have also thought about this argument. If someone is an alumnus who deserves a wikipedia page, but one has not been created yet, such as a university president, then I would create the page, but the average alumni doesn't deserve a page. Perhaps for someone who is an actor or singer who doesn't have a page the proper thing to do would be : Actor's name, character name on show name.Airpear 13:54, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

NPHC Organizational Presidents

Hi, I have made templates for two NPHC organizations except Omega Psi Phi and Iota Phi Theta, due to lacking information on the internet. Whenever someone can find this info, can they please contact me, thanks. Miranda 05:18, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Delta Lambda Psi

Hi there. I wonder if anyone would care to find a source to establish the notability of Delta Lambda Psi? I have failed, and fear someone may list it for WP:AfD eventually. Thanks --TreeKittens 05:01, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

I only see one chapter of this organization. And, I have done a google search. There is no official website for this organization. Thus, I agree, someone needs to list this as an AFD. M.^(er) 21:15, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Hey guys, I know that there is a GLBT fraternity at the CU campus named Delta Lambda Phi...Wiki article Keylay 22:41, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Hey guys, this is the Student Organization Advising and Resources page for the University of California Santa Cruz and Delta Lambda Psi is clearly stated as being a reputable student organization here at UCSC. http://soar.ucsc.edu/organizations.htm

Please let me know how I can get the Wikipedia page back up and running. We are not part of Delta Lambda Phi, and have taken steps to not be associated to that organization. Thanks so much128.114.2.18 16:12, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Responded to request for help on the IP's talk page. — [ aldebaer⁠ ] 17:34, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-09-22 Delta Sigma Theta

Deals with the naming scheme of GLO. Input is appreciated. M.^(er) 04:20, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

See page. I think we have reached a compromise. Miranda 10:37, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Category renames

See this page for the nomination to 'fix' the category names. Your input either way is appreciated. Who knows; maybe y'all even want to rename the WikiProject, since the one we have now is so long and cumbersome. —ScouterSig 23:07, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Locals need sources?--Comments wanted

I am putting this idea out to see what everyone/anyone thinks: if a local is put on the List of social fraternities and sororities, they either need to have a wikilink OR a College/University listed where they are. This would mean that hundreds of these listed there would need to be referenced, located, or deleted. I am only trying to find a way to ensure that only legitimate organizations get put there; a recent edit seemed very suspicious, but it checks out. What do y'all think is the best way to do something? —ScouterSig 14:17, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

I think this is a great idea. I have always been bothered with trying to find information on local houses. I think we also need to figure out what makes a local fraternity or sorority notable enough to have its own page. Acidskater 17:45, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Totally agree. If they are red linked thats a big red flag. I'm loathe to base notability solely on Google but i think for the purpose of locals which by their nature can be rather transient if a Google search does not turn any thing up on them then they should be deleted. This is not to say however that all local chapters are not important. Indeed some locals are some of the most powerful Greek organizations on campuses with long storied histories that deserve their own independent wiki pages. My personal experience however, is that the huge majority are a couple of friends calling themselves Greek, or possibly most common a national Greek organization that was at some point in the past kicked off campus and is now operating semi or totally underground under new letters. Those i would not consider notable. What does all this rambling add up to? Well i propose that as far as notability guidelines go if their university recognizes them as an official society then they are notable enough to be mentioned. This should do away with most locals that are simply underground national chapters. If no university recognition is found then unless there is overwhelming evidence found through verifiable sources of their notability, they should be quickly deleted.

Thats my rather long and rambling two cents. Of course this would mean that at the very least a Google search of every single listed local and finding out what their university is most i note have the university included which is helpful. I would also put a note on the edit page that if one does add a local to be sure and add the university to cut down on future leg workTrey 18:43, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Just checking to see if my suggestions were feasible i randomly selected a local chapter a sorority called Theta Chi Epsilon that was redlinked. I went to the school web page typed Greek life was offered a list and discovered that Theta Chi Epsilon is indeed there and has a long history at Michigan Tech established in 1940 with many alums and active members. It took about 1 minute to do this. So certainly many locals deserve at least a mention I'm sure quite a few warrant full independent wiki pages I think this sorority may. its just up to us to cull out those that don't.Trey 18:53, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Addition: Would it be appropriate to order the (inter)national groups by council (IFC, NPHC) when appropriate? To me, this would greatly aid in seeing if someone is just adding "stuff made up in school one day" or the like. It is already done on the List of fraternity and sorority mottos page. —ScouterSig 19:46, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

I think that would be great. It would definitely help with navigation. Acidskater 19:52, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Please take a look

Could someone please take a look at the Delta Omicron page and comment. I have been trying to do some work but it has been slow going. Would appreciate input in either the Delta Omicron page or my talk page. Crazzycorbe (talk • contribs) 21:01, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Comments left there. Miranda 03:46, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Secret/Ritual information

All (well, most?) fraternities and sororities have secrets and rituals that distinguish members from non-members. These might be handshakes, secret words or phrases, dances, head-nods, or whatever. Generally, I would assume that most do not want this information published on Wikipedia.

So, in the case of a random editor adding such information to a WP page about a given Greek organization, even if another editor removes that information, it's still accessible in the history of the page. Is there a way to get the history expunged for these types of edits? --MikeVitale 15:53, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Short Answer: "no"

Long Answer: "nope"

Sorry :( Justinm1978 17:00, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Technically, yes. You can ask an administrator to do delete some revisions of the history, posing that it is not harmful to the organization. Miranda 19:59, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

If other editors are looking back in the previous versions and that information is unsourced there's no real way to tell it's not vandalism actually. If you're a member of that particular greek org. you might know for sure but doesn't mean that other people can tell. It happens a lot in Greek orgs unfortunately; true and false 'secret' information being added in. Best thing to do is just ask for references that pass WP:V and WP:RS which can't be provided in nearly all instances, remove the information. --ImmortalGoddezz 17:12, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Those were the expected answers, but you don't know if you don't ask. TA muchly. --MikeVitale 17:25, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

No prob, wish the answers were more helpful though :/ --ImmortalGoddezz 17:35, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Alumni categories up for deletion

All, if you have an opinion either way, please note that the bulk of user categories for your school of graduation are up for deletion at this page right here. This is a chance to speak your mind about how education can/does/does not affect Wikipedia work. —ScouterSig 03:58, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Alpha Kappa Alpha PR

Hi, I would appreciate any feedback concerning this article. I am trying to make this an FA, and would appreciate any input. Miranda 10:53, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

List of notables (again)

Bringing this up again but in a different light/manner. I've mentioned before that I've been working on the NPC articles (on and off) and basically have taken each chapters list of notable alumnae, removed the redlinks and cited them, etc. Now that I've gotten all the non-redlinked people on there cited and the format of the list updated I'm beginning to go back and add founders and eventually other redlinked notables to my own master lists: list 1 list 2 (FratMember format) since being inclusive does leave out a lot of members. The FratMember format that I've been using in the second list, to me, looks bulky in the article (which is why I haven't migrated them to the main pages yet). Would it be possible/advisable to create one master list (eg. something like List of Notable members of National Panhellenic Conference organizations) and just have a link on every NPC with notable members pointing there? I am against creating a "notable alumni of xxx" page for every organization in the NPC since some of the lists only have 7-10 people in them, but that's just me. Another thought is that as one big list with some formatting and work that it could possibly be a featured list one day. Any thoughts/comments/opinions/ideas/suggestions on this? --ImmortalGoddezz 20:05, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't think creating a 'master list' and getting rid of smaller lists would be helpful. If you were to do that, the list would be extremely long or you would have to be extremely inclusive (which would take away from the article). I do agree that not every organization should have a notable alumni page, but that easily taken care of by just keeping the list within the organizations page. It is when the list gets large that it would need its own page. Acidskater 20:44, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

If you look at List of Alpha Phi Alpha brothers, that may help to see what a featured list looks like. IMHO, if the notable members are long, then you should have a separate list. Short, incorporate the list into the article. Miranda 23:32, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

That is some fantastic work IG, but I agree with Acidskater; a single page seems too long and less "intimate" to the parent organization. If a single group has a list too small for its own page, let it stay on the org's main page. Another point I have is that the "Rumored" section seemingly incriminates itself as un-encyclopedic and impossible to cite, so I think an article containing that will have a stigma against it. But again, great work! —ScouterSig 03:23, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

I figured the longer list would be nay-sayed but thought I'd ask for opinions anyway since I don't like the frat member format in the individual article.. plus never know. As for the rumored section that's more of a personal section that I add to and double check occasionally to see if I can find any reliable sources for the people who are frequently added to the lists. Probably should have mentioned that just the notables in the organizations would be added to a 'notable list' page, and the rumored section is a self reference, eh well. Thanks for the input everybody I appreciate it and I think I'll just keep most of the sections on the page unless they're huge; which is about 2 or 3 articles with a good deal of people. --ImmortalGoddezz 03:31, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Peer Review

I wish this project had a peer review (individual), like WikiProject Biographies. I am having a hard time explaining the sources of a sorority (Alpha Kappa Alpha) which is under GA review. Miranda 06:17, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of List of Greek organizations at Morgan State University

An article that you have been involved in editing, List of Greek organizations at Morgan State University, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Greek organizations at Morgan State University. Thank you. Miranda 02:22, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Sorority Songs

Issue with List of Alpha Kappa Alpha sisters. Should publicly available songs of fraternities and sororities be available for Wikipedia to see? Think WP:CENSORED. Miranda 10:19, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

• if its a publicly available song that can be verified i see no reason it that it could not be included in an article. My question would be if it is notable and important to the article. What exactly is the issue here?Trey (talk) 16:43, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
• I like Rho Mu's poem, and think it "fits" better with the List article than J. Marjorie Jackson's song. My question on that talk page was how notable that specific piece of verse was; if there is something more notable that fits as well, that should (I believe) be used instead. There should be nothing wrong with including a song; aSigma Chi song, Sweetheart of Sigma Chi, even has its own article. Jackson's song would be better on the main AKA page, rather than the list page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scoutersig (talk • contribs) 16:56, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Nah, I don't think Jackson's song would be appropriate on the AKA page. Too long. Rho Mu would be fine, I guess. Miranda 03:28, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

As a member of the sorority I see nothing wrong with displaying public song, poems, chants etc. I would like to suggest a poem that is used by most of the chapters world wide. A lot of poems and chants are specific or created by a certain chapter. The one entitled "And God Said" is universal and used quite a bit on sorority paraphenalia. You can find it here [1].Knicksfan4ever 19:38, 30 November 2007 (UTC)