Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Fraternities and Sororities/Archive 1

message: I have to add my own input regarding my own little 'section' after stumbling onto this wikiproject. The NPC articles seem to be moving along quite well, I fix what I can (besides Alpha Epsilon Phi and Delta Phi Epsilon) and the pages seem to have a nice flow. Most of the pages  have the same look/feel (infobox) and I personally feel, for the most part, they are complete (excluding the ones previously mentioned). I have taken the whole section under my wing; adding missing info boxes, reverting vandalism, and adding information/pictures where I can. I know Dysepsion, Lanoitarus, and a few others regularly contribute (long before I came to that particular section) but I feel besides some of the missing info, and horribly long pages filled with chapter's links (which I abhore), they are pretty much taken care of. Not that they can't be improved upon, but just stating my opinion here, and starting to ramble as well. --ImmortalGoddezz 04:38, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please continue to do so. We also need to remain cognizant that this Project is for Fraternities *and* Sororities Naraht 12:25, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPC Sororities 

message: Perhaps what we need to do is to merge the positive aspects of the HTML boxes into the infobox template.  My biggest concern is still ease of editing.  My HTML skills are limited and when I'm fixing and expanding the other fraternity articles I will use the infobox for ease of editing.
Can I have anybody's opinion on this? Dspserpico 15:15, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template: Infobox Fraternity 

message: Is joining a Wikiproject as simply as adding your name? Sign me up. — vijay 20:41, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I also would like to assist. I've worked extensively on both Alpha Phi Omega and
Fraternities and sororities in the Philippines. Naraht 13:15, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Joining?

message: For now, I think it is best for us to figure out a consensus of what we need to do by getting the best articles in the scope of our project and trying our best unify in look and content.  I think the following articles can be our "prototypes" for what we want to do with this project.
*Alpha Sigma Phi It's a pretty good article
*Phi Delta Theta good article and I don't think Dyspepsion would mind if we tinker with it a bit
*Alpha Phi Omega
*Delta Sigma Phi
*Theta Xi  (I know the alumni need cleanup -- Aaron charles)
The articles are are either already good, or has an active memeber of the project as a main contributor or both.  This way we can experient with actual article without going into a revert war with a possessive editor.  If you have any ideas of more articles to place on the list, plase add to it.
Also, I'll try to have a boilerplate of this project up by mid-afternoon tomorrow, California time.  After that, I don't think I'll be able to get anything done because I will watch alot of baseball this weekend and I will boo Barry Bonds, alot.  Dspserpico 04:21, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Our plan of action 

message: Let me know what you think and make edits if you feel like it.  Is the "Red Plastic Cup of 'Soda Pop'" too much? Dspserpico 06:39, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: D- I wish we could find a better icon than a plastic cup. Let's skip the paddles, too. I am curious to hear what ideas others come up with. I need to think about it. For now I have added to the Wiki Projects User Boxes, keep up the good work. -- Aaron charles 02:28, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Let's avoid symbols derived/associated with hazing and drinking. I'd even say that they're NNPOV. The typical symbol of fraternalism seems to be clasped hands: I'd pick something like that. Since this is for frats and sorors, stylized, ungendered hands might be better than a photo, if clasped hands were adopted. I'm sure there are other symbols of fraternity, but nothing comes straight to mind. I'd rather see a fez than a “red cup”. (This is mainly copy pasted from my comment below. Is that bad form? If so, sorry, in advance.) — vijay (Talk) 18:27, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I would agree with that even though I've had many a red cup in my day. I'm ok either way with what you all decide.Pat 18:40, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Boilerplate up 

message: Thanks for your input about the red cup.  I think the red cup should stay for the userbox template and as joke award among us ("The Wikipeida Red Cup of 'soda pop'" given for outstanding contributions to fraternity and sorority articles; it should be our own barnstar).  I think poking fun at fraternity/sorority stereotypes is acceptable when it is only among us.  I'm going to replace the red cup with laurels on the serious templates.  Are laurels OK?
:that seems fine. I think the red cups are still pretty cool tho  --Samwisep86 05:13, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: At times I feel like the wikipedia could use a dose of humor, but this is supposed to be a professional quality resource, so no fun allowed, in my opinion. Personally, I'm less inclined to use a userbox with a red cup, but I'm wiki-savvy enough to change it for myself if necessary. I've got no real problem with others using it. The templates are serious, as was said, and I think the laurel wreath is a good choice. Columns, might also be good, now that I think of it--but not particularly better. I think I'm happy the way things stand now. — vijay (Talk) 05:41, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Templates and the "red cup"

message: Look at Alpha Phi Alpha it's actually a featured article. Dspserpico 02:48, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it's not. The page actually needs some work. Alphachimp talk 00:28, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow. I guess I was wrong. A vandal removed the majority of the page and it's featured article flag. Keep watching the page, he's likely to come back.Alphachimp talk 00:33, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Other things

message: I was just wondering how we're progressing on the project. I went thru all of the NIC frats a couple of days ago and added templates where necessary. Are going to continue doing the same and adding and find frats or concentarte on something else within the project? --Samwisep86 06:16, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We also need to add templates to the talk pages of greek system pages, sororities, and ethnic fraternities and sororities. Dspserpico 22:54, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Progress

message: My local library has a copy of the 1991 edition of Baird's Manual of American College Fraternities, which I plan on taking a look at some time soon. If anyone wants any info from that book, I'd be happy to grab it.
Also, wikisource has the 1897 edition — it's in the public domain. Of course, many groups didn't exist in 1897 and none are the same as they were then. — vijay (Talk) 05:35, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I own the 1991 version and I think I've got 1976 around somewhere. Any idea how far back we have to go before we get to the public domain? Also before we copy everything out of Baird's we should check to see if the fraternity has changed its mind on level of privacy. I know of at least one thing in an old Baird's that the GLO does not want particularly want highly publicized. Naraht 12:29, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: 85 years after the death of the last author for US published things I think but I could be misremembering. ++Lar: t/c 20:27, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, there's always Public_domain#Expiration. According to the article, all editions of Baird's written and published before 1923 are in the public domain. Indeed, wikisource agrees. Unfortunately, only the first edition has been made electronic. I'm not complaining, though. Much credit to Choster for typing it up! (There's still more work to be done... if anyone has access to an 1897 ed. of Baird's!) — vijay (Talk) 21:03, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Baird's Manual 

message: Just wanted to tell everyone on the project to keep up the good work! It's nice to see people getting together to tidy up greek organizations in general and not just the ones they belong to. A year ago I would've participated in the project but life got in the way and don't edit as much anymore =P  --† Ðy§ep§ion †  Speak your mind 17:42, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Keep up the Good Work! 

message: I keep an eye on this project even though I do not consider myself a member of it. Over all I do not really have any advice, besides as stated previously by others keep off the typical frat/sorority stereotypes. What I do have for you though is a suggestion. Iota Nu Delta has recently undergone a ton of updates, of which are all copyrighted. I've contacted the fraternity because the updater says that he has permission from the president to use the material as per Wikipedia:Confirmation of permission but I have yet to hear back from the fraternity. Unfortunately the article needs some heavy revision in spite that. For one it sounds like a rush brochure, and for the other the infobox has been revised so it's not the projects standard infobox. Over all it's highly biased, uses weasel words, etc. I would work on this article myself but I just don't have the time that this would require. Which is why I throw it to you as a suggestion. --ImmortalGoddezz 14:19, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestion