Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Fraternities and Sororities/Archive 4

message: Wouldn't mind some input on this discussion, on whether or not it's relevant to add the Bruce Ivins Kappa Kappa Gamma obsession to the article. Thanks, --ImmortalGoddezz (t/c) 07:02, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: This issue has been resolved.  Thanks for your input, all! 207.237.33.6 (talk) 03:03, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kappa Kappa Gamma/Ivins mention 

message: There is a thread on the administrators' noticeboard which may affect editors involved in this WikiProject. Please see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Lyrics. CrazyPaco (talk) 01:05, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: College songs

message: I have been searching for information.  But sources should be checked regarding the date that Alpha Gamma Delta was closed on campus.  In the MU Greek Life page, it states that it was in the spring of 1993.  This was not the case.  Alpha Gamma Delta was closed spring semester my Freshman year and that was 1990.  In addition, I am not sure that Alpha Gamma Delta sold their house to the fraternity that is listed.  My reasoning is because Sigma Kappa moved into the house and where there until I graduated in August 1993.  When I graduated Alpha Kappa Lambda was residing in a different house that was closer to Frat Row than Greek town.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajb1971 (talk • contribs) 23:53, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: MU Greek Life

message: After making some improvements to another member list template, I was asked to update some others, and other editors have copied some of these changes. In order to keep all of this centralized, I have created  with the ability to create lists for general members, alumni, fraternities and faculty and is easily expandable. This template includes an image list that maintains the images in the proper place regardless of the screen size. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) talk -  16:11, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template FratMember 

message: Hi!  I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate.  This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.
All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group.  If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot (Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 05:27, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coordinators' working group 

message: I need to know what the wikipedia policy is on naming and inclusion of chapter articles. The Mu Theta chapter of the Zeta Psi fraternity appears to have made an article on their chapter, how should it be named and how should it interact with the Zeta Psi article?
--metta, The Sunborn 05:06, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: As a general rule, individual chapters are not notable. I don't see anything particularly noteworthy about this chapter. —C.Fred (talk) 05:27, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The relevant guideline is Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Non-commercial organizations: "Individual chapters of national and international organizations are usually not notable enough to warrant a separate article unless sufficient notability is established through reliable sources that extend beyond the organization's local area. However, chapter information may be included in list articles as long as only verifiable information is included." --—— Gadget850 (Ed) talk -  18:12, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think we should have chapter articles on organizations per Wikipedia is not a directory. miranda 18:34, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chapter articles 

message: Are there precedents of adding the accolades obtained by a college frat member even though there are no evidence that point out that the awards are directly related to the frat itself? The article listed above gives a list of frat alumni with their corresponding honors. I don't think that the awards give any information regarding the frat itself unless it is proven that frat directly influenced their members to obtain such awards.--Lenticel (talk) 08:26, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: If I understand your question correctly, I think you would want to list that member as a notable member. Then list the award on that member's Wikipedia page.  If the member is not notable enough to have a wikipedia page, then he should not be listed (nor the award).  See WP:NOTE  I have heard some people suggest things like "X fraternities members have included past presidents and Nobel Prize winners". So, you could probably say something like that and make sure it's tightly referenced. I'm leaving out of town in just a few, so I won't be able to respond further for a while.  --Lhakthong (talk) 14:24, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: okay. So should I remove members that have no Wiki articles?--Lenticel (talk) 04:12, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: This is similar to the problem i have ran across in trying to clean up the Tau Gamma Phi article. Lots of people with no way of telling if they are in any way related to the fraternity and even if they are very questionable notability. I notice one alum's notability on the Sigma Rho page is based on his achievement of becoming an Century 21 prestige Realtor... This is probably not going to pass a notability test. Having a unchallenged wiki page has served as a rule of thumb of late and i for one like it. I would recommend wiki linking the people on the article and deleting the ones who come up red. Most are not going to be notable under any standard. If they are a Governor or some actor though a quick Google search might be in order. Some groups are quite sensitive about their pages :) Trey (talk) 10:22, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks guys, I'll be using your advice to clean up the article.--Lenticel (talk) 14:17, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

text: The link test is a good one, but it is not the end-all. Some people without pages are notable, where sometimes (albeit less often) people with pages aren't. I have been working hard on List of Zeta Psi brothers and one brother has the highest American medal for bravery but doesn't have a wiki page. Another brother is the grandson of the founder and very longtime chairman of the Molson brewing company. Everyone in Canada knows the Molson beer company, but Eric Molson doesn't have a page. Another case with a notable person without a page would be an 8-year chairman and CEO of Price Waterhouse. Also, from my point of view I don't consider state representatives or senators as being notable or just being an Olympian without winning medals others may disagree. Just being a rear admiral or two star general doesn't make one notable. However, having several slightly notable things might make one notable. Like being a rear admiral and being the international leader of the Knights Templar, that would be notable. Things in life aren't that easy and cut-and-dry. --metta, The Sunborn 03:21, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Sigma Rho]] 

message: Wouldn't mind if somebody watchlisted this (Alpha Pi Lambda) - local frat on my campus has recently discovered they have a wiki page and want to whitewash the negative info, replace it with text from the local website. I think at this point I'm relatively too close to it to keep reverting (and I know somebody who has reverted it already) so any help would be appreciated. --ImmortalGoddezz (t/c) 14:53, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll be happy to put it on my list. Thanks or all the vandal help too btw. I've seen you around on a lot of my watched pages lately. way to go. Trey (talk) 19:21, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  ok so the one guy seems to want to start a edit war. I'm about to max out on my reverts. its not that he's really killing the page but what he is taking out is notable and his additions are a little on the fluff side. also his revert comments are snarky and i resent the implication that i spend too much time indoors. :) 
I left him a message maybe he will work with me but i kind of doubt it. I seem to have been involved in a few discussions lately so I'd really rather not have to get an admin formally involved here but i agree with Goddezz's version of the article that she has been going to. It follows guideline and read better than the one that the other editor is reverting to. Anyone else care to throw two cents in.Trey (talk) 20:15, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

text: Thanks Trey, I appreciate it! I'm really beginning to hate editing these articles (DU) since it seems to make me a point of attack and/or outing.. --ImmortalGoddezz (t/c) 21:36, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Alpha Pi Lambda

message: Notability needs to be established through citation to reliable secondary sources that are independant of the subject (per WP:ORG).  At the moment, the only citations are to the fraternity's website.  The article will be nominated for AfD if this is not fixed (it has been tagged as needing citations since 2007). Blueboar (talk) 13:29, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I see maybe four news articles mentioning the subject here. It also appears in quite a few books here, at least some of which to be kind of significant, with several other mentions, most apparently fairly trivial, here. John Carter (talk) 14:37, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see what the issue is. This group has several chapters throughout the country a quick Google search returns thousands of hits they have been established for over 100 years at several major universities and have several notable alumni. An AFD is completely pointless in this case notability is easy to see and prove. Citations are always a problem for Greek pages because of the lack of academic work done on them. Please check the multitude of other discussions on this page concerning this issue. Trey (talk) 21:13, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the best way to resolve this is for the editors of the Acacia page to link to some of these secondary sources.  Blueboar is assrting that Acacia's notability is not documented, not that Acacia is not a notable organization. One way notability is demonstrated is by citing third-party sources, and Blueboar is saying that this has yet to be done.  If there are so many third party sources, which it seems there are, the editors should just cite those sources for info included in the article, and that should put the issue to rest.  --Lhakthong (talk) 17:16, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

text: Because, while I know Wikipedia's notability guidelines well enough to see that there was a problem with this article, I don't know the topic or the sources well enough to actually fix that problem.  It seems you do, since you were able to fix it so quickly.  Thank you for that. Blueboar (talk) 13:29, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yeah, until you pointed it out i had never been to that page. But i know running a Google search can sometimes be hard to manage. Figuring out what words to use and what links to click... hard stuff. Anyways glad i could be of help in this caseTrey (talk) 01:03, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Acacia Fraternity]] 

message: This message is being sent to WikiProjects with GAs under their scope. Since August 2007, WikiProject Good Articles has been participating in GA sweeps. The process helps to ensure that articles that have passed a nomination before that date meet the GA criteria. After nearly two years, the running total has just passed the 50% mark. In order to expediate the reviewing, several changes have been made to the process. A new worklist has been created, detailing which articles are left to review. Instead of reviewing by topic, editors can consider picking and choosing whichever articles they are interested in.
We are always looking for new members to assist with reviewing the remaining articles, and since this project has GAs under its scope, it would be beneficial if any of its members could review a few articles (perhaps your project's articles). Your project's members are likely to be more knowledgeable about your topic GAs then an outside reviewer. As a result, reviewing your project's articles would improve the quality of the review in ensuring that the article meets your project's concerns on sourcing, content, and guidelines. However, members can also review any other article in the worklist to ensure it meets the GA criteria.
If any members are interested, please visit the GA sweeps page for further details and instructions in initiating a review. If you'd like to join the process, please add your name to the running total page. In addition, for every member that reviews 100 articles from the worklist or has a significant impact on the process, s/he will get an award when they reach that threshold. With ~1,300 articles left to review, we would appreciate any editors that could contribute in helping to uphold the quality of GAs. If you have any questions about the process, reviewing, or need help with a particular article, please contact me or OhanaUnited and we'll be happy to help. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:32, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: GA Sweeps invitation

message: I would like for someone to assess Phi Mu Alpha Sinfonia for elevation to a new quality classification. I just completed an extensive revision of this article and am certain that it is now above Start-class. However, I'm a relatively inexperienced Wikipedian and am not sure how good it actually is, and of course it needs an uninvolved editor to review it. I'd like to think that it's close to GA, though I know it probably needs some more 3rd party references. Thanks in advance for helping with this! Michael07lu (talk) 04:37, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I've actually decided to go ahead and nominate this article for GA since it was reviewed for GA once before and failed miserably. Hopefully if it doesn't meet GA criteria then the review will provide good feedback. Michael07lu (talk) 19:06, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: This article has finally been given a GA review, but I must conceded that it will probably not be successful due to a lack of independent sources. Outside of finding a larger variety of sources to cite, I feel that the article certainly rises above Start class and would request that someone associated with this WikiProject re-evaluate the article. I feel that it is probably a B Class article. Michael07lu (talk) 16:46, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Reassessment of [[Phi Mu Alpha Sinfonia]]

message: Do we have any guidelines as to under what conditions a list of Fraternities and Sororities should be ordered by the Greek Letters (i.e. Omega Psi Phi last) or by the english spelling of the greek letters (i.e. Zeta Psi last)Naraht (talk) 15:36, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: *Also, if the list were sorted by Greek letters, where would non-Greek-lettered organizations be sorted into the list? —C.Fred (talk) 16:21, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: **Tri Delt, Triangle perhaps? miranda 04:35, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ordering by Greek vs. English. 

message: I'd like suggestions on doing Chapter lists for a fraternity/sorority. I think everyone can agree that the school and the chapter designation (like Gamma or California Gamma) should be in the list. Which other fields do people feel are acceptable? 
#City/State of the chapter/school? 
#Status of the chapter (Active, Inactive, Colony)? 
#Which Province/Region/Area of the Fraternity it is in? 
#Founding date? 
#Date of Inactivity (if exists)? 
#Refounding date (if appropriate)?
Also, for the Status of the chapter, I've seen a page that designates inactive chapters with a gray background, useful or annoying?
I have most of the information above for my fraternity, I'm just looking to see which columns may not be appropriate.Naraht (talk) 20:11, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chapter list characteristics. 

message: Phi Delta Theta has been nominated for a reassessment, as part of WikiProject Good articles 'Sweeps', in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for one week. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If these issues are addressed during the hold period, the article will remain listed as a Good Article. Otherwise, it will be delisted. Reviewers' concerns are here. Thank you. –Whitehorse1 01:17, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA (Sweeps) Reassessment of Phi Delta Theta 

message: I am going to AfD this article, because it's a non-notable chapter of a club. miranda 05:47, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Phi Gamma Delta Epsilon Chapter]]

message: This article needs lots, and lots of help. El Johnson (talk) 19:56, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: [[List of high school fraternities and sororities]]

message: I don't see where this has come up before in the talk archives, but I'll mention the new situation here regardless. A relatively new account, , has added text to the Sigma Alpha Epsilon article pointing out that their ritual manual and secret mottoes are on Wikileaks. He has not added said mottoes to the article.
On further reflection, the edit is within the primary-source guidelines. It reports that the leak is published but not any of the leaked contents. Based on the age of the organization, it stands to reason that copyright has lapsed on the manual, so the link doesn't violate the copyright infringement restriction on external links. 
Has this issue of leaked secrets come up before? I'd like to get a wider set of eyes on the situation. —C.Fred (talk) 23:55, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikileak of Sigma Alpha Epsilon ritual manual 

message: Hello. I might take a shot at working on some lists of members over the next couple months, but before I do so I want to make sure I do them right. First, is there any guideline for what [[List of [frat] members]] articles can be created, i.e. could I split that off of any major Greek organization? Second, what's the proper way to write the article name; is it List of Pi Pi Pi members or List of Pi Pi Pi brothers (or sisters)? I've seen both and it should be consistent. Wizardman 06:08, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two questions 

message: Hi. I'm here to notify this project of an article in the Wikipedia:Article incubator, which is a new project to provide an alternative to deletion or userfication. It's for articles that are not up to standards, and would be deleted, but someone has expressed an interest in keeping them longer than the seven days of AfD to work on them. You can read all about it at the page.
The article I'm notifying you about here is Wikipedia:Article Incubator/Tau Omega Mu Fraternity and its Ladies' Circle. This one was tagged as a speedy, but then an editor moved it to the incubator, where it's been for nearly a month.
If someone from this project wants to help bring it up to standards, that would be cool, or if you deem the topic to really not deserve an article, i.e., it can't be brought up to standards, then we can proceed with deletion from there. I want to make sure people here have a chance to see it, anyway. Cheers. :) -GTBacchus(talk) 03:39, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article wanting attention in incubator 

message: This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:20, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  WP 1.0 bot announcement 

message: I have taken some time to make some update to the Sigma Alpha Epsilon Pi page by adding some references, adding some philanthropy references, and reorganizing the chapter list.  I would greatly appreciate some style help as I have a difficult time figuring out the code for some things.  I would also greatly appreciate some suggestions on other material to add.  Thanks
AlgaeGirl (talk) 16:29, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm taking a look at it right now, focusing on converting the refs from bare links into  or similar templates. —C.Fred (talk) 16:38, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sigma Alpha Epsilon Pi 

message: *Hello, I'm a newbie at editing here, so I'm not sure about proper protocol.  Anyway, The Jefferson Duo page has lost its home.  First it was changed to a redirect to Triads (fraternities), with the content added there.  Then the content was deleted.  I started to discuss this at Talk:Jefferson Duo.  I'm not sure if that is the proper place to discuss this issue, or if this is.Thanks, NYCRuss (talk) 22:33, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jefferson Duo Discussion Notification 

message: It seems to me that it would be a good idea to create a welcome template specific to this WikiProject.  I'm personally partial to using Template:W-graphical as a foundation.  The information that I'd like to add is:
*A quick link to this project.
*Common mistakes that new Greek editors make.  Specifically, I'm thinking about WP:COI and WP:OWN.
*A friendly challenge to elevate content to good article, featured article or featured list status, with a brief road map mentioned that includes a link to WP:PR, and perhaps other useful stuff like copy edit requests.  I believe that this can channel the energy of Greeks to embrace Wikipedia standards. NYCRuss ☎ 18:25, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Can we include something to indicate that accounts should created for a reason other than simply trying to publicize *one* fraternity secret? (Annoyed? not much.)Naraht (talk) 19:05, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

text: Seriously, I think it is a pretty good idea. Could it be appropriate for both accounts and IP editors?Naraht (talk) 19:05, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: We could have two templates for both accounts.  The general one that I like so much comes in two versions; Template:W-graphical and Template:W-graphical-anon. NYCRuss ☎ 14:58, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

text: What do think of this?  I left out mention of some of the other stuff because it seemed like too much. NYCRuss ☎ 16:12, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject specific welcome template 

message: There is an RfC about Phi Kappa Psi#University of Arizona at Talk:Phi Kappa Psi#RfC to remove the University of Arizona controversy, and comments are appreciated. NYCRuss ☎ 17:34, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  RfC to remove section about Phi Kappa Psi's University of Arizona chapter controversy 

message: I think one of our goals should be that we make lists of greeks for each institution of higher-education. What do you guys think? - Talk to you later, Presidentman (talk) Random Picture of the Day 23:03, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: At this point in time, I disagree.  I think that we should first improve the quality of existing articles, and then recruit more people to the project to share the load in quality editing.  That said, you are certainly free to start lists.  Just be aware that many such lists have been merged into the main articles of the host institution.  Unless there is a lot of content that meets Wikipedia standards, be prepared to see your work redirected and merged. NYCRuss ☎ 23:22, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I think a pretty good "base template" to start the list articles you're talking about would be The College of William & Mary fraternity and sorority system (full disclosure: I made that, but still I think it's pretty good). Jrcla2 (talk) 18:32, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lists for each institution 

message: On the Kappa Sigma page, I'm dealing with someone who believes that anyone who is in any fraternity has a WP:COI when it comes to editing any fraternity. I'm in Alpha Phi Omega which is a co-ed service fraternity, which is about as "far away" as two groups both calling themselves fraternities in common usage. So under what circumstances should someone be considered to have a COI in regard to a GLO that they aren't a member of? IMO, only if the groups are legally bound (Zeta Phi Beta & Phi Beta Sigma) or if the groups share National level resources (KKPsi and Tau Beta Sigma *or* Alpha Nu Omega fraternity and sorority). Does anyone think it should be wider than that? Same Triad? Same Conference (NIC, NPC or NPHC)? All GLOs?Naraht (talk) 04:01, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:COI uses "common sense" in the definition.  In my opinion, it is common sense that anyone who establishes a user name that contains that organization's name, or who only edits one article has a WP:COI. Unless someone has an agenda concerning another organization, I'd limit it to just the organization to which you belong.  NYCRuss ☎ 06:03, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  RFC:Fraternity brother COI for *all* fraternities? 

message: An administrator is looking to have an RFC on how to handle chapter events (such as hazing incidents) on the page for the National Fraternity. Talk:Kappa Sigma  He doesn't want to do it here, since he doesn't think it would be balanced. Is there anyone on this project who isn't a member of a fraternity or sorority?Naraht (talk) 19:12, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anyone here *not* a member of a fraternity or sorority? 

message: Should the list of National Conferences for a GLO be a wikipedia page if the information is large enough? Assume at minimum year, location and what number convention it is? Right now there is an AFD for Kappa Sigma's list at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Kappa_Sigma_Grand_Conclaves . AFDs are not votes, but I thought I should bring it up at the project. Kappa Sigma is not the only GLO to currently have a page with this (or similar information).Naraht (talk) 12:56, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of National Conferences as Wikipedia page? 

message: I'm looking for help in putting a NPOV on membership requirement changes in Fraternity and Sorority articles. For example, is this NPOV?
When MMM sorority was founded in 1901, it was limited to only Taoists of Negro Descent. After unsuccessful attempts to open membership to non-Negros in 1951, 1954 and 1957, MMM was opened to all races in 1960. Unsuccessful attempts to open the sorority to non-Taoists were made in 2002 and 2005, A charter was revoked in 2002 at University of North Alaska for pledging a Protestant and a charter was revoked in 2009 at University of South Wyoming for pledging a Jew.
If there are separate history and membership sections, any advice on which one to put it under? (Assume that this paragraph is littered with references.)Naraht (talk) 15:38, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Membership requirement changes. 

message: The fraternity and sorority infobox () needs to be standardized with the infobox syntax. I tried to figure it out, but was unsuccessful. --GrapedApe (talk) 19:22, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template standardization 

message: This project seems devoted to social fraternities and sororities. However, the discussion pages for several honor societies (e.g., Tau Beta Pi; Phi Beta Kappa) say they're a member of this project. Casey (talk) 12:30, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: IMO, they do belong. Fraternities and Sororities as a term definitely involves the professional and the service GLOs, and I'm not sure trying to split out the honoraries really makes sense, especially since Phi Beta Kappa is a part of the history to all other Greek Letter Organizations.Naraht (talk) 12:49, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Naraht.  Fraternities and Sororities can be social, academic, and professional, or a combination of the aforementioned, to named a few possibilities.  Moreover, not only is PBK part of the history of all fraternities and sororities, as Naraht mentions, it is the oldest fraternity in the United States, first it was a social and literary fraternity and then became an honor society as we understand it today.--Lhakthong (talk) 20:46, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Honor societies belong here? 

message: If you feel like trying to salvage fraternity and sorority articles, I suggest just about anything in :Category:Fraternities and sororities in the Philippines. Naraht (talk) 22:34, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Salvage possibilites 

message: Can I get some more eyes to look at the situation of Zeta Omega Eta? It looks like the article is being hijacked by a group of the same name at Arkansas-Monticello. This revision in particular is heavy on text about the UAM chapter while only glossing over the Trinity chapter—yet it's the latter chapter that got mentioned in Salon magazine, not the former. No fully independent sources about the UAM chapter have been provided; the UAM meeting minutes support that an organization was formed in October 2003 at UAM named Zeta Omega Eta but give no further details. —C.Fred (talk) 13:33, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you and I've added it to my Watchlist.Naraht (talk) 14:16, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Zeta Omega Eta 

message: mounting my information on Wikipedia
I entered my personal info so as to become a Wikipedia contributor. I wrote a Wikipedia page for the Alpha Tau Gamma fraternity in Amherst, Mass. I reviewed it. It looked OK. When I log out and log back in to type Alpha Tau Gamma, I do not find what I entered? Where is my text? Alphataugamma (talk) 13:37, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  mounting my information on Wikipedia 

message: Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone.  Articles were selected based on their assessed  importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.
We would like to ask you to review the Fraternities and Sororities articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details.  You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th.
We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010.  As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide.  Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback! 
For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 23:02, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fraternities and Sororities articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release 

message: Just for your information: the article on Alpha Pi Lambda is currently being considered for deletion. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I have the general idea that the article is salvageable if an expert pays some attention to it. There are currently a number of "loose ends" that are tantalizing hints for making something out of this, like:
* "During the first few years, the primary aim of the fraternity was to gain recognition on campus and insure its permanence." How did they do that?
* "The board helped the fraternity stay on campus during the war." How? What measures were taken, what initiatives unrolled?
* "They brought home customs and traditions that strengthened the fraternity's culture." For example... ?
* "the efforts of the newly created alumni corporation" What did they do? What was the corporation? What did they do after the mortgage was paid off? Do they still exist?
* "Thus they placed a strong emphasis on building positive character traits, management skills, and leadership abilities." Come on, they didn't do that just through balancing the checkbook and washing the dishes, did they? What else did they do in this area?
* "The fraternity was closed in 2002" Why?
* "The fraternity was reinstated in April 2006" Why?
* "In 2009 the fraternity petitioned Drexel University to remain a local fraternity and won its appeal." Appeal? What appeal?
In other words, plenty of leads if there's anybody available who can fill in the blanks (and maybe save the article from deletion)...  
Best regards, -- BenTels (talk) 17:48, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alpha Pi Lambda (Drexel University) 

message: I am extremely dissapointed in this project given the lack of greek involvement in it. Unless a party is a member of the greek system they have no room to comment on it.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.84.205.200 (talk) 17:45, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have specific suggestions for pages or templates that need to be created or improved?Naraht (talk) 18:02, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I wouldn't be surprised if Greeks only want to edit their own organization pages, and not that of others.  I'm keeping an eye on several Greeks, mainly because they are focused on the LGBTQ community. Jademushroom (talk) 10:01, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

text: I'm keeping an eye on two other Greeks largely because of efforts to WP:Censor information about their Greek from the page. (Info from the Kappa Sigma Founding and the Greek Letters for Phi Gamma Delta). I also try to keep a look out for all Greeks from the Philippines. I'm not sure any of the ones entirely in the Philippines are in even close to good shape. :( Naraht (talk) 10:39, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dissapointed in this project. 

message: *Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Archive222#92_articles_which_as_a_class_all_seem_to_me_to_violate_WP:NOT.23DIRECTORY:
**Discussion of "list of chapter" articles as a class possibly violative of our guidelines.--Orange Mike  |  Talk 16:45, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of chapter articles discussion at AN (Proposed deletion)

message: The large flurry of AfDs for organizations starting in Alpha is due to , who has done some bulk nominations. He's also proposed deletion on Acacia Fraternity and Chi Omega, which calls into question whether he's just nominating everything that shows up in the project. Heads up to project members. —C.Fred (talk) 01:25, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: And Wikipedia:Administrators%27 noticeboard/Incidents#Bizarre AFDs as the reaction.Naraht (talk) 03:14, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mass AfD nominations 

message: Does anyody know anything about Pat Green? I believe he was in the Farmhouse Fraternity at Texas Tech but since they got shut down he joined Beta Theta Pi. Is this true?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.155.216.212 (talk) 09:36, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This is probably better addressed at Talk:Pat Green than at the project level. However, the cited source in the article currently doesn't support his membership in Beta Theta Pi. —C.Fred (talk) 13:52, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pat Green? 

message: There is disagreement in the Mother of Fraternities page. That moniker has been used to describe both Union College and Miami University. Now one can argue that Union College is the main college that deserves that moniker because the Greek organizations founded there are older. However, another point can be made that Miami is more deserving of that moniker because the membership number of the Greek organizations there is far more superior than those founded in Union college. In the end though, this is a moot point because it's all just a matter of opinion. I'm perfectly fine to have it stated that both colleges are referred to Mother of Fraternities 'equally'. Indeed this is the way it has been since the article was first created. However recently an editor disagrees. The editor at first removed any references to Miami University. When I fought this the editor re-introduced Miami University but implies that Union College is THE primary college that is referred to Mother of Fraternities. There is no evidence to support one way or another which is why it would be best to revert to what the article once was as to avoid bias or implication; that "Mother of Fraternities" is a term commonly used to refer to two different universities. Please someone chime in as to avoid an edit war. 71.106.150.61 (talk) 22:26, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Mother of Fraternities]] 

message: I've run into issues making tables of fraternities and sororities sortable due to the use of look-alike Latin Alphabet letters. For example, people using AXΩ rather than ΑΧΩ. The first only has one greek letter in it, the second has three. There are even a few Fraternities and Sororities where their entire name is writable in the Latin Alphabet like Zeta Beta Tau, PLEASE use the proper alphabet!Naraht (talk) 20:25, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please use actual Greek letters rather than Latin alphabet lookalikes. 

message: Which of these is preferred?
*Williams attended X University and was a member of Kappa Alpha Order.
*Williams attended X University and was a member of Kappa Alpha Order Fraternity.
*Williams attended X University and was a member of Kappa Alpha Fraternity.
Note that both Kappa Alpha Order and Kappa Alpha Society are members of the NIC and have wikipedia pages. Kappa Alpha is disambiguation page between the two.Naraht (talk) 16:39, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: "...member of Kappa Alpha Order" is appropriate. Kappa Alpha Order Fraternity and Kappa Alpha Fraternity are grammatically incorrect, as the title of the order is "Kappa Alpha Order", not "Kappa Alpha Order Fraternity". You might say: "...a member of Kappa Alpha Order, a fraternity", if you wish to explain that it is a fraternity. SilkTork ✔Tea time 11:31, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  phrasing for the 'Kappa Alpha's. 

message: While dealing with Split requests, I've come upon a number of requests which were made in August last year, to split off some embedded lists in Fraternities and Sororities articles. These are either lists of members or lists of chapters, or sometimes both. Lists of people need to meet WP:LISTPEOPLE and WP:NLIST, so cannot be split out into standalone articles until they are fully sourced; they also need to meet WP:WHENSPLIT. 
While lists of notable alumni is accepted practise on Wikipedia, the lists of chapters has given me some concern regarding the notability of such lists. Local chapters by themselves are not regarded as inherently notable per WP:CLUB, and I'm not clear why a list of such local chapters becomes notable enough for a standalone article, nor, indeed, if such information is generally encyclopaedic enough to list out in full in the parent articles. I'd be interested to hear rationale for why complete lists would be appropriate for either standalone articles and/or sections in parent articles. SilkTork ✔Tea time 17:03, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Lists and notability

message: Please see this discussion on Commons about fraternity/sorority pins being up for deletion. miranda 18:47, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of Fraternity/Sorority Pins Up for Deletion in Wikimedia Commons 

message: Hi, everyone.  Just wondering if we should have some uniformity regarding how fraternities, sororities, and honor societies are categorized on a college/university page.  For example, at Indiana University of Pennsylvania, honor societies are mixed in with fraternities, and those are listed separate form sororities.  I'm not sure that makes sense.  I'd like to propose that (honor) societies are listed separately than fraternities and sororities.  In the rare cases of organizations like a co-educational honor fraternities, those should be listed under fraternities with a parenthetical notation that they are co-educational honor fraternities.--Lhakthong (talk) 16:20, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Organizing frat/sor/hon.soc. on an educational insitution's page