Talk:Alpha Phi Omega/2007

message: This page shows an APO chapter at a university in Australia.  If legit, the article should be expanded to cover.  Someone should probably contact National or International and ask.  If not legit, I'm sure they'll take proper steps.  GRBerry 22:39, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is legit, the APO-Phil Alumni groups in Australia have been trying for quote some times. While we haven't had the type of coverage in the T&T that APO-Phil has had. I think they are officially an observer to ICAPO, along with the Organization that runs the APO-Phil alumni groups in North America. I think I'll write the member of the Board for International Relations. Naraht 11:45, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Australia? 

message: We now support diversity per the 2006 national convention.  Woot!! 129.2.175.110 06:46, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Diversity

message: Should the national director, board members, and region directors be included in the article?  They play a large part in the fraternity and it could expand the information available on wikipedia.  I am personally partial to Mike "Spreeeeeeeee" Haber, Region 2 director, and would like to see him and other region directors listed on the article.  
72.226.238.186 04:20, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: this is information that can easily be obtained from out National website.  Why put it here?  --emb021 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 136.182.158.137 (talk) 20:51, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Staff Listings? 

message: Gamma (Cornell) and Delta (Auburn) have gone back and forth for years about which one has been active longer. (Alpha is currently inactive and Beta was inactive for many years). I'm just not sure that fact is significant enough for the Wikipedia page. Note that the person who added the fact that Gamma was the longest continually active chapter came from an IP address at Cornell. Naraht 11:52, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps Judy Mitchell can settle this one for us? I mean, seriously, who's going to go against her word? Dr. Cash 16:51, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I count her as having better things to do. Besides, Delta hasn't *really* been active since founding. The October 1934 Lightbearer, Vol 9, No. 2 has an article on page 6 about the reorganization of Delta chapter including the sentence: "Delta chapter had been inactive for the last two years, and it is largely through the efforts of Professor A. L. Thomas, Professor Joe Barrett and Professor H. M. Martin that this unit of the fraternity has been established." So the brother (presumably) from Gamma is probably correct, but it isn't relevant to the article. Gamma actually initiated brothers each of the Calendar years during WWII which was when many chapters went into de facto (but normally not de jure) inactivity. Probably had to do with the fact that it was selected as one of the A-12 & V-12 program colleges and APO chapters were allowed by Dept. of War and Dept. of the Navy to pledge soldiers on campus for those programs. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Naraht (talk • contribs) 17:59, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.  Hats off to them for keeping their chapter going, but it really has no relevance to the article and adds no real value. Justinm1978 15:10, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Longest continually active chapter 

message: I've nominated this article for good article status, based on Justinm1978's recommendations (see history of this page). Wish it luck! Dr. Cash 17:10, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This article has now been listed as a good article. Congrats to all of the other editors working on the page! Also, the related page, List of notable Alpha Phi Omega members, has been nominated for Featured List status (owing primarily to Naraht's tireless hours of finding famous alums and references for them! Wish it luck! Dr. Cash 22:35, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Good article nomination

message: If you want to keep GA status, find more inline citations (refs), otherwise I can almost guarantee one day someone will come along and submit it to WP:GA/R. Rlevse 10:03, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This artilce is listed now for a GA Review. The refs are not sufficient for a GA article. Also review article for further improvement, like linked solo years.Sumoeagle179 21:01, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA status-refs

message: :This artilce is listed now for a GA Review. The refs are not sufficient for a GA article. Also review article for further improvement, like linked solo years.Sumoeagle179 21:01, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA Review

message: Should we use the APO abbreviation at all in the article (other than explaining that it is a common abbreviation)? Naraht 13:53, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of APO abbreviation in the article. 

message: Does anyone have access to the isse of "Torch & Trefoil" mentioned as a source?
The trefoil is not a symbol of scouting, but of guiding. The Girl Guides are a sister movement to the Scouts, even though in many countries scouting is now coed, in some others scout and guide associations merged.. and in some countries (such as the USA) the local guiding association calls themselves "Girl Scouts".
Therefore, the origin of the Trefoil might be something else...
--Lou Crazy 01:10, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trefoil as a symbol of scouting? 

message: Number of active chapters 371.
School (Region/Section)
Petition Groups:7
Emporia State University (VIII/34)
Interamerican University of Puerto Rico, Metropolitan Campus (IV/98)
New Jersey Institute of Technology (I/99)
Saint Anselm College (I/94)
Tarrant County College -Southeast (VII/41)
University of Illinois at Springfield (VI/47)
Western Washington University (XI/8)
Interest Groups: 9
Centenary College of New Jersey (I/99)
Northwestern Michigan College (VI/53)
Penn State Altoona (II/90)
San Diego State University (X/2)
University of Miami (IV/74)
University of Redlands (X/2)
University of Texas at Tyler (VII/41)
Wagner College (I/97)
Wayland Baptist University (VII/40)
 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Naraht (talk • contribs) 16:45, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Current Numbers 

message: The article was delisted, see the article history template for a link to the discussion. Quadzilla99 17:02, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Does anybody else besides me see a lack of good faith on this review?  How is it possible to have accurate references outside of APO about APO? Justinm1978 01:14, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA Review results

message: A note was left on my talk page requesting further comment on this article's recent delisting, especially with regards to its level of referencing.  Also, the above comment by Justinm1978 disturbs me.  I made the comment requesting external sources, and am requesting a retraction of the above accuation.  I made the comment in good faith in the interest of seeing this article improved to the point where it CAN be a good article.  Blatant accusations of bad faith, where there is no evidence to support it, should not be leveled.  Please stop with that.
One of the central tenets of Wikipedia is the neutral point of view.  Another important tenet is reliability of sources.  When you put these two ideas together, there is a key importance that the information in an article is referenced to independant references.  References FROM the subject of an organization are a useful and important part of building an article, but where an article lacks ANY independant sources, it can hardly be neutral.  Please consider the following quotes from wikipedia guidelines and policies:
*WP:WIAGA (the Good Article criteria) requires that the policies and guidelines of Verifiability and Reliable Sources are followed in articles seeking GA status.
*From WP:V (Verifiability policy): 
**"Articles should rely on reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy." (emphasis mine).  This article does not rely on third-party sources.  All sources are published by APO directly.
**"self-published books, personal websites, and blogs are largely not acceptable as sources." When APO publishes information about APO, it is a self-published source.  It should not be used exclusively in an article.  While this policy states that such sources "may be used in articles about themselves" it is clear that these should not be the ONLY sources...
*From WP:RS (Reliable Sources guideline): "Reliable sources are credible published materials with a reliable publication process; their authors are generally regarded as trustworthy, or are authoritative in relation to the subject at hand."
**An organizations own self-published material hardly goes through any editorial process, and thus could hardly count as reliable.  While I make no statements about whether or not such sources are actually fair and balanced in their coverage, there is no way to ensure that they are and thus should be used sparingly, such as for non-controversial material such as membership numbers, mission statements, and organizational leadership and activities.
*From WP:OR (policy against Original Research):
**"Material that is self-published, whether on paper or online, is generally not regarded as reliable" Again, articles should not rely on self-published sources.
*WP:WIAGA also requires that an article is "Broad in coverage" such that it "addresses the major aspects of the topic".  If there is NO external references, then we have NO broadness.  If we have no information on the impact of this organization on its community, especially when it claims to be an organization built on community involvement, is spurious.  If they are truly so involved, where is the third-party evidence of such?  Surely SOME independant news source has reported on their work?  They are on hundreds of college campuses, has NO college newspaper, or any other third-party source, EVER done a story on them?
*WP:N (Notability Guidelines):
**"Generally, a topic is notable if it has been the subject of coverage that is independent of the topic, reliable, and attributable." (emphasis mine) While I am certain that APO is a notable organization by this definition, the article presents no coverage by such independant sources and thus makes no assertions of its own notability.  
**""Independent" excludes works produced by those affilliated with the topic including: self-publicity, advertising, self-published material, autobiographies, press releases, etc" Again, we have a requirement that SOME attention is given to indepenant sources.  This article gives NONE.
**"In order to have an attributable article, a topic should be notable enough that the information about it will have been researched, checked, and evaluated through publication in independent reliable sources. " (emphasis mine) Again, we have a requirement that an article's subject have information in independant reliable sources.  I see no evidence in this article that it does.  Again, while I trust that such sources DO exist, this article makes no attempt to provide information as provided by those sources, and thus cannot be comprehensive, neutral, or well-referenced.
*WP:NPOV (Neutral Point of View policy):
**"All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), representing fairly and without bias all significant views (that have been published by reliable sources)."  We have NO significant views of this organization from outside of the organization.  The article cannot be said to present a neutral treatment of the organization without such.
**"it is clear to readers that we do not expect them to adopt any particular opinion, this leaves them free to make up their minds for themselves, thus encouraging intellectual independence"(emphasis in original policy page) How can we assure intellectual indepenance on this subject when all of the information on the article is NOT independant of the subject?
These concerns I expressed in the Good Article Review were based on policies and guidelines of wikipedia, and out of a genuine concern that I want this article to be a Good Article some day However, it is clearly NOT THERE YET.  Do NOT bandy about accusations of bad faith, especially where none exists.--Jayron32|talk|contribs 18:08, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Two good places that reference APO from the outside are from BSA and the Lafayette Archives. I've added a reference from BSA and some from the Lafayette Archives (and will try to add more). Oddly enough, in terms of external sources, I believe that if an external location like a University lists something about Alpha Phi Omega in a student handbook, *even though that information may have been given to them by the chapter*, it counts as an external resource. So in that regard, since Wayne State University includes the fact that Alpha Phi Omega has 350,000 members it is good to include that as an external reference.Naraht 12:49, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Notes for article improvement

message: I see that lists of APO-USA and APO-PHIL national conventions have recently appeared in the article. This is actually good, but I'm not sure it should go exactly IN this article. Since they're mainly just lists, I think it might be better to add them to a separate, linked page. Perhaps, we might also want to add a short paragraph or so into a section in this article, telling people about the significance of national conventions to the fraternity, since non-members reading this will probably not know what their significance is; then, this new section could link to the separate page with the lists of conventions.
I'm also thinking that we might want to put the lists of national presidents on a separate page as well; the templates at the bottom are a bit awkward to read, and could probably be better organized as a sequential list on another page. Dr. Cash 19:34, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Both of the concepts were from other pages: The national presidents were an idea copied from Alpha Phi Alpha, the Conventions were from Alpha Kappa Alpha. Wish I had more info on the APO-Phil conventions. Naraht 19:45, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: national convention lists

message: The secretary at the APO National Office said that the colors were pms 286 and pms 1253 and included the RGB values.Naraht 16:39, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am aware of this as well. While it will help in color schemes and matching, I don't think it's necessarily all that important or notable to actually include the information in the wiki article; though we can use it to make sure we get colors right for images, logos, and things of that nature. Dr. Cash 19:29, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think that the information on the pms values should go in the article, I was just sort of providing more information on where I got it (mostly because I couldn't find a way I liked to do a reference. I just wanted to make the colors for the color blocks next to "blue and gold" correct. I'm thinking of redoing it with a border (like Langston University), but I'm not sure.Naraht 20:51, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's fine. The way you've done it in the infobox is fine. Dr. Cash 21:36, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Color samples from National Office 

message: At this point, I see the following as verifiable primary sources for the issues of Gender in the Fraternity. 
* The National History book, specifically page 28 which contains the second half of the History of the Fraternity in the 1970s.  
* The National Pledge manual, specifically pages 9 & 10. (http://www.apo.org/site/site_files/pledgemanual.pdf) 
* Torch and Trefoils (Note, I don't have them all online and am missing most of 1969 to 1977, but anything I do include, I'll be happy to forward the electronic copies)
* National Board minutes. (http://www.apo.org/pages/show/About_Us/Board_of_Directors/Minutes)
::As an additional note, Board meeting minutes older than 1996 are listed and linked, but don't seem to be available. I'll have to look into this. Dr. Cash 18:08, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Older Board meeting minutes are available through archive.org's copies of the National Website.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by Naraht (talk • contribs) 19:25, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed verifiable sources for the gender information. 

message: I'd like to propose the following addition/change to the gender section. In place of 
In the early 1970's, co-ed membership was proposed by several chapters but failed to reach the two-thirds majority support at the National Conventions which was required to alter the organization's bylaws.
it is proposed.
At the 1972 Convention, delegates for the first time considered a proposal to admit women to the Fraternity as affiliate members. While this amendment was supported by a majority of the delegates, it did not receive the three quarters necessary to pass. A resolution was passed to encourage and expedite the involvement of women in Fraternity affairs. Alpha Phi Omega History Book (1925-1993) p.28. Earlier that year, the National Board of Directors had taken action "[u]nanimously recommending a serious consideration of the participation and status of women in the work of the Fraternity, both as members and advisors."Alpha Phi Omega Board Meeting Minutes 25-26 February 1972
I don't know why it said two thirds was said before, but we current require three quarters to amend and the history book says three quarters was also true then.Naraht 12:47, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought the first proposal from the board to admit women was in the late 1960s.  I'll see if I can find that somewhere.  I'm also fairly sure that unless the organization's bylaws say otherwise, 3/4 is standard to amend bylaws per RRO.  So, I think we'll need to find an old copy of the NBL to backup saying it required 2/3.  Henrymrx 13:18, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The 2/3 comes from BornYesterday's attempt to clear up something that jdhmdtraum wrote. My guess is that he just didn't remember our NBL correctly. BornYesterday, please let us know.Naraht 13:59, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm pretty sure I took the 2/3ds from what was previously in the article (or maybe from the discussions here. If it's in error, then I'm not putting up a fight over something that minor. And I like Naraht's re-writing, pending date verification. Bornyesterday 00:49, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thank You. What specifically would you like verified? The 1972 date for the Convention comes from the History book (Those sentences have been changed just enough to not cause trouble) and I can scan that in and email it. The Minutes are online.Naraht20:33, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

text: It's interesting that you're telling, um... someone, not sure who, that they need to look at the facts again, but you're not able to cite the specific Convention you mean.  "About 4 - 6 years ago..." is not sufficient evidence and even if it was it certainly does not support the statement "At almost every National Convenmtion..."  It is the responsibility of those who want something added to make their case.  The burden of proof is not on the challengers.  Challengers who, by the way, have attended most of the National Conventions in question.  Henrymrx 17:10, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed addition (Gender) 

message: Lets see. The edit of the article by 172.164.122.232 just happens to be someone who continues the argument on jdhmdtraum's side without missing a beat. The edit from 66.168.81.139 is from Charter Communications KNGPT-TN-66-168-80, which happens to be the same company and city where the original edit that started this entire things is from.Naraht 17:21, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oooh, he made a funny. I'm in Maryland, he is in Illinois. Declaring someone as a sockpuppet or a meatpuppet tends not to work very well when both have more than 6 months of edits. Take a look at our list of contributions. (If you need help, here are mine and his. Is there overlap in the articles we've worked on, absolutely. Both of us were heavily involved in the effort to have the page for Alpha Phi Alpha listed as a social fraternity. Naraht 18:07, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reverts by unlogged in users. 

message: I should have the remainder of the Themes up within the next couple of days. Both the 75th anniversary CD and the National History book have most of them post WWII  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Naraht (talk • contribs) 20:51, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conventions 

message: It looks like the image of the APO crest was deleted by a copyright nazi, claiming that there was no copyright information on it. This should be addressed. While it is definitely copyrighted, I don't think the national office would have a problem with using the crest on the wikipedia page,...  It should also be noted that it was speedily deleted by ElinorD without posting any type of comment to the talk page or nominating it for deletion, which I find to be a rather bold and unacceptable move considering that the image has been on the page for a long time. Usually, wikipedia etiquette calls for information editors on the talk page prior to deleting an image, particularly one that has been posted on a page for a long time - this gives ample time to find the correct copyright tag or permissions. Dr. Cash 03:00, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I saw that as well, and noted on his talk page that he did not follow the policy stated in the reason he deleted the picture. I'm assuming you'll repost it and give it the citation he wants,  even though it falls into fair use.  Justinm1978 03:39, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have responded to the talk page, as well as posted a report of the incident to the administrators' noticeboard regarding this "rogue" administrator. Dr. Cash 05:01, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Image of crest deleted

message: http://www.gmanews. tv/video/ 11505
 
Hazing of APO Mu Delta Chapter or TIP QC, apparently one of their sis who is a researcher of GMA News approached her brods and asked if she can have an interview with their brods about thier initiation rites. (GMA is doing documentaries about fraternity hazing as an offshoot of the recent death by a neophite of the sigma rho fraternity in U.P.) In the course of the interview, their asked permission to take video shots with the agreement that nothing will be aired on TV. apparently it was shown last saturday in Jessica Sojo Reports and then again the following day in GMA's early evening news 24 Oras.
TIP QC have expelled 23 residents of APO in connection to the incident.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.188.105.230 (talk) 16:47, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The video can be properly seen here:  http://www.gmanews.tv/video/11505  It is indeed very disturbing and I hope that if this really is APO, that the APO-Phil National Office takes immediate action.  Is there anyone here who can translate the dialogue on the video?  Henrymrx 19:12, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Holy crap! That's definitely not a real APO ritual! The "brothers" involved ought to have their membership revoked by APO-Phil; expulsion is not enough. Unfortunately, I don't speak tagalog, which is likely the language that the report is in. Dr. Cash 22:04, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Anyone have any clue where in the report that they mentioned that it was Alpha Phi Omega? And I am quite sure that APO-Phil HQ will revoke membership. They have before for hazing incidents with less photographic proof. Naraht 22:22, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  need counselling 

message: I've finally located Zeta chapter's website. It appears that the issue was the correct website address is not on apo.org since it wasn't entered in a case-sensitive manner. So the correct address to access their chapter website is http://www.stanford.edu/group/APhiO/. The site appears to be active and currently maintained as well, which is good in terms of reliability.
Checking out the 'about us' section, they have a few details that they are claiming regarding their chapter which are rather interesting:
* 1970s – Larry Quan as president of Zeta shocked many chapters with his letter denouncing the Vietnam War. (this was mentioned in the earlier debate by Jrhmdtraum, though it clearly isn't related to the gender debate, it did take place at a similar time in the chapter's history)
* 1970s – Zeta started the drive to make the fraternity Co-Educational by changing its chapter's by-laws to allow women as members of the chapter, referring to them as "sisters." (although this is not definitive evidence that said Zeta for sure "started it all", as we know that there were several other chapters that were initiated women early as well; perhaps we should mention a few of the early chapters though, collectively?
* 1973 – The first female active, Beth Hesselmeyer, pledged in the fall. (Beth's initiation date per the national office database is listed as 1975; no exact month/day is specified, though; but her graduation date is listed as 1975 as well, so it's likely that she was initiated earlier and records were updated at a later date).
Hope this clarifies a few things mentioned earlier. Dr. Cash 07:07, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Zeta & the gender issue

message: I have been contemplating some restructuring and organizational changes to this article for awhile. Mainly, much of the content in the article is really history, yet there is no specific 'history' section. The 'background' section really is not appropriate, as basic background information should be covered in the lead. Plus, info there about the founding is historical, and the info on the T&T should be moved to a new section entitled 'publications'. The organizational info in the 'organization' section either deals specifically with the history of the ICAPO or APO-RP, or with the specific organizational structure of APO-USA (not covering the organizational structure of APO-RP at all).
The 'membership requirements' section should be changed to simply, 'membership', and most of the gender info should be moved to a history section, since it's largely history. Although I understand that there were concerns previously about putting this lower in the article to somewhat "hide" it from anonymous editors who might want to vandalize it -- most of that has really calmed down with the decision of the 2006 convention, and that's really not a reason to not put it where it belongs.
I think the article should also have a new section covering 'national programs', similar to the Alpha Phi Alpha article. Some things to cover here are some of the more notable national programs, like APO LEADS, National Service Week, and Spring Youth Service Day, which aren't even mentioned in the article at all. Also, if we can find a good, independent media source for some of these programs, it would help to counter some one of the criticisms of self-referencing brought up in the article's GA delisting (NSW might be the easiest to find here, since it's been around the longest).
What do others think about these suggestions? Dr. Cash 06:00, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I like your ideas, especially the part about National Service Week.  We should include the history of the event, as well.  A lot of Brothers don't know that it started out as National Service Day.  We should also list past themes and programs of emphasis.  This could also make the article less organizationally focused and more service focused, which I think would be a significant improvement.  Henrymrx 09:46, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you think we can pull off splitting out APO-Philippines in this reorganization? I've been hoping for about the last 3 months for an APO-Phil brother to add something, but it hasn't happened. I should be able to pull off some additional history from what I've found recently. Also, the question of what to name the article comes to mind. The Title bar for the APO-Phil website (www.apo.org.ph) is "Alpha Phi Omega Internation (Philippines), Inc.", but given what is going on with the NPHC GLO pages with whether Inc should be in the description, I'd rather not go with the full name. The name underneath that is Alpha Phi Omega with the next line International Collegiate Service Fraternity and Sorority. However given that on the front page of the article they do refer to themselves as simply "APO Philippines", I think we can probably do "Alpha Phi Omega Philippines" as the title or maybe "Alpha Phi Omega of the Philippines". Ideas?Naraht 12:54, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

text: I'm surprised nobody has done anything on NSW, SSD or APO LEADS.  Of course, I could've done that as well, but for some reasons I never thought of it either :)  Anyway, I like how the APA article has organized their national programs, and that's certainly a direction we should go.  I'd also like to see APO-Phillippines eventually become a separate article, and I think we probably have enough now to break it out into Start-class article.  If we go that route, I suggest this article retain "Alpha Phi Omega" for the name and a single-line disambiguation at the top pointing to "Alpha Phi Omega (Phillippines)" or something similar, where the phillippines stuff is moved.  Also, the "Inc." issue has been resolved to the satisfaction of both editors (and was never just limited to the NPHC organizations by any means, but those seem to be the articles that got the most attention)  Justinm1978 04:56, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

text: I've reorganized the page, putting history-related materials into a new 'history' section, and creating a new 'programs' section for APO LEADS, NSW, & SYSD. I've also combined much of the older 'background' section into the introduction, and added a new section for 'publications'. Dr. Cash 06:17, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: reorganization of content

message: I have placed the contents of the "Story of Inclusion of Women" in Alpha Phi Omega on the the 75th anniversary CD on a sandbox page User:Naraht/WomenInclusion. I see two possibilities here. First, that the article be combed for facts to be added to the Alpha Phi Omega page or second, that it become the basis after being rephrased for a separate Alpha Phi Omega Gender article. Note, this isn't entirely cleaned up since I had to take cut it from the source file and the quotes are goofy. Ideas?Naraht 14:48, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inclusion of Women article from the 75th anniversary CD 

message: At this point in the article our two significant changes in membership are dealt with *completely* differently. The admission of women is now up in history and is four or five times the size of the admission of non-scouting men, which is still down in membership. I would like to see the two in the same place *and* I would like to see the two equalled in size by moving a significant amount of the information about the admission of women into its own article along with what is in the sandbox  page User:Naraht/WomenInclusion.Naraht 10:04, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Asymetry history/membership  

message: The following list of Filipino Colleges and Universities was added to the article.  I've moved it here.
  - University Belt Association (UBA)
    1. Alpha             - Far Eastern University (FEU)
    2. Beta              - National Universtity (NU)
    3. Delta             - Mapua Institute of the Technology (MIT)      
    4. Epsilon           - University of the East (UE)
    5. Iota              - Philippine Maritime Institute (PMI)
    6. Kappa             - Guzman Institute of Technology
    7. Mu                - Manuel L. Quezon University (MLQU)
    8. Pi                - University of Santo Tomas (UST)
    9. Sigma             - Adamson University (AdU)
    10. Tau              - University of Manila
    11. Upsilon          - Philippine College of Criminology
    12. Psi              - Centro Escolar University (CEU)
    13. Omega            - Feati University
    14. Alpha Delta      - San Sebastian College
    15. Alpha Epsilon    - Technological Univ. of the Phils (TUP)
    16. Alpha Eta        - Philippine School of Buss. Admin. (PSBA)
    17. Alpha Theta      - Lyceum of the Philippines
    18. Alpha Lambda     - Technological Institute of the Phils. (TIP)
    19. Beta Sigma       - San Beda College
    20. Beta Tau         - Arellano University
    21. Gamma Epsilon    - De La Salle University (DLSU)
    22. Gamma Iota       - Philippines Christian University(PCU)
    23. Delta Beta       - Gen Emilio Aguinaldo College (EAC)
    24. Epsilon Beta     - Perpetual Help College
    25. Eta Kappa        - Colegio de San Juan de Letran (CSJL)
    26. Iota Eta         - University of the Philippines, Manila (UP-Manila)
    27. Iota Psi         - Arellano Law School
    28. Kappa Alpha      - Pamantasang Lungsod Ng Maynila (PLM)
I'm fairly certain that this is not by any means a complete list of chapters in the Phillipines.  Can someone tell me the relevance of this list then?  Henrymrx (talk) 03:51, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this is a list of chapters in the University Belt. Since the University Belt is inside Manila, it is a subset of NCR (National Capital Region). Imagine if all of our chapters in Section 97 were active (20 some) and that was one of the APO-USA regions (and then have that grouping include more than just one Ivy League school)... Naraht (talk) 06:36, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of Filipino Schools 

message: Looking for better numbers for APO-Phil chapters. I'm not really sure where the number 250 came from, but the change to 326 didn't have any references. From the sources for lists of chapters that I've found on the net, one goes up to Lambda Phi, another to Lambda Beta and a third to Lambda Iota. Given that they overlap, I trust that APO-Phil Lambda Phi does exist (it gives a school name for that and the previous), so I think this shows that APO-Phil does have any least the 264 charters that Lambda Phi indicates. I don't know if we have *any* sources on the number of chapters that are active. For the purposes of APO-Phil activity, I believe that the only logical way to count is those charters were either the Fraternity chapter or the Sorority chapters is active. Note I also updated the charters for APO-USA to 735, the most recent is Alpha Zeta Omicron.Naraht (talk) 17:04, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Number of chapters for APO-Phil