Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Fraternities and Sororities

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit]

Scope of the Project, Notability Rules (clarification), and Syntax for the Watchlist are linked here: Watchlist Talk Page. A discussion on the types of chapter status is here: F&S Project talk page, Archive #7.

Cleanup project (updated)

[edit]

The main list of infobox issues can be found at .

  1. Missing image size - (Category:Pages using infobox fraternity with missing image size (74)
  2. missing |member badge= - Category:Pages using infobox fraternity with missing member badge (883)
  3. missing |chapters= - Category:Pages using infobox fraternity with missing chapters (62)
  4. missing |members= - Category:Pages using infobox fraternity with missing members (823)
  5. missing |website= - Category:Pages using infobox fraternity with missing website (146)
  6. Missing country
  7. Unreferenced - working list pulled and shared in a new section below 29 June 2024
  8. Notability - working list pulled and shared in a new section below 29 June 2024
  9. Primary sources - tracked at petscan
  10. Has bibliography but lacks inline citations - tracked at petscan
  11. Needs color boxes (Helpful link, has colors, flags, and addresses of Baltic, Scandinavian, German, and Polish fraternities)

Rublamb (talk) 20:40, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Portal Diskussion:Studentenverbindung

[edit]

I've reached out to the Discussion group over on dewiki at de:Portal_Diskussion:Studentenverbindung#Request_knowledge_from_english_language_wiki_on_Studentenverbindung and got some really great answers to things. And as I said before, I'm thinking of creating an Template:Infobox_Studentenverbindung equivalent to https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vorlage:Infobox_Studentenverbindung if I can understand all the fields.Naraht (talk) 19:42, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

After working on several Studentenverbindung articles recently, I found that what looked like an infobox for many was actually a code-generated table. All are now changed to "Infobox fraternity". I don't think we need a new infobox, but suggest adding "Zirkel" as a field option to Infobox fraternity. (Color for Couleur is a reasonable translation). Everything else works as is. We just need to create some instructions or at least answer these questions"
  1. Are we going to use color boxes or ribbon approximations?
  2. How do we determine the correct terms for emphasis; i.e. linking to the German word article for dueling, non-dueling, no couleurs, Catholic, and Christian? Or do we use the English translation?
  3. Do we use "Infobox fraternity" for individual fraternities and their umbrella groups? If so, what is the correct type for the umbrella group? The groups that used to have "Infobox organization" were called "trade association" under type. Umbrella group seems pretty informal.
Also, most articles use the foreign language version of the fraternity's name, rather than the English translation. Do we want a translation at the top in parenthesis or should we have a field/free field for the English translation? I struggle with which is correct here. Just consider, why are we using the German word Studentenverbindung instead of its translation? Is there a precedent in other parts of Wikipedia for continuing to use the foreign word instead of its translation? Rublamb (talk) 18:36, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Article cleanup needed

[edit]

One of our main articles, Fraternities and sororities, has had a factual accuracy tag since March 2023. I just added a few sources, which is part of the issue. Since others have worked on this article in the past, you may have a better idea of what content is questionable. Rublamb (talk) 18:08, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is also a discussion on the articles Talkpage about moving this to Collegiate fraternities and sororities. Rublamb (talk) 22:27, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We just discovered History of North American fraternities and sororities which was off the radar because it lacked WikiProject tags. The two articles relate in many ways. I could see a merger of the two and/or splitting the history and cultural content into two articles. It would be a big project since these are both long articles. Rublamb (talk) 23:45, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Awareness builder

[edit]

Editors with ties to some of the GLOs -- some of the bigger social fraternities and APO are examples -- brand their User pages with small banner tags noting membership. It might be a helpful long-term objective for the Project team to create these, one for each society in their colors, that they might be picked up by editors (typically, new editors) to drive Project participation. We could pin them to each Talk page, with instructions for use. Jax MN (talk) 17:50, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Userboxes/Collegiate sororities and fraternities Rublamb (talk) 02:58, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have updated the userbox template list on our Watch List so that it is easier to see which groups already have a userbox template. (I still need to check our list against the one linked above). However, some existing userbox templates are basically unreadable because of a lack of contrasting colors.
If we are going to add these to all articles relating to the GLO, my suggestion is the horizontal template that nests under the WikiProjects, rather than the verticle box that floats to the right of the page. I don't recommend putting the userbox code in a TalkPage comment as that could be auto-archived. Does anyone need to see examples of the two formats before commenting? I am willing to work on inserting the templates if there is agreement on style. Does anyone volunteer for template cleanup duty? Rublamb (talk) 18:16, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Naming articles for Latvian, Estonia, Russian, and German groups

[edit]

We need to get a handle on naming conventions for student associations and corporations articles. We seem to have a mix of full foreign-language names, the Korp! nickname, the nickname without Korp!, and English translations. When working in this area yesterday, I found little consistency with Latvian and Estonian group names--the English Wikipedia article's names typically do not match the German Wikipedia name, sometimes using the formal name when that is not in use in German Wikipedia or the group's website. Also, the English translations may or may not be correct. This can eventually be fixed with redirects, but I am struggling to figure out the best common name format so we can be consistent across all articles. Refer to List of student corporations in Latvia and List of fraternities and sororities in Estonia for examples of the article name variations. (Note that I have linked to German Wikipedia if I could not find an article in the English version). Rublamb (talk) 22:13, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As these are (or ought to be) treated more comprehensively in their native language Wikis, I think we should include a link to the original language article and use a consistent naming structure, probably the 'full' name, not nickname. As long as these are treated consistently within the English language Wikipedia, I would be amenable to whatever of the options you list that you determine works best. Jax MN (talk) 22:52, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In most cases, using the full name is like naming an article "The Grand International Sisterhood of Moo Moo Moo, Incorporated", rather than "Moo Moo Moo" or "GIS Moo Moo Moo". (The later being what many of these corporations use on their websites, with "GIS" being common identifier for groups of that type). Since we already follow Wikipedia's naming guidelines and use the common name with US GLOs, I am pretty sure the article's title should be a shortened. It would be helpful to have a member of one of these groups or someone who speaks the language help us naviage what are and are not essential parts of the full name. For example, using "Korp!" may be akin to saying "Chi Psi Fratenity", with Korp translating as the unnecessary word "fraternity". Rublamb (talk) 23:25, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Honor Society Museum

[edit]

www.honormuseum.org might be useful. With https://honorsocietymuseum.org/all/ being a list of those groups with a specific page about them. Right now we have *one* article that uses information from there: Rho Kappa.Naraht (talk) 00:14, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

At one point, someone replaced some of the dead links to ACHS member pages with links to this website. However, I don't know if it is connected to ACHS. Rublamb (talk) 02:00, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I *really* don't think it is, diving into it leads to https://www.honorsociety.org/ , which I get really bad vibes from. "Honor society for all" which looking at the site means less than nothing. I was always looking into an honor society because it gave a good dental plan.Naraht (talk) 03:26, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I had the same read on honorsociety.org. It seems like a for-profit website, possibly getting paid for click-throughs to honor society websites. It would be helpful if the "museum" were a reliable source because many of the societies formed in the late 20th and 21st centuries need more sources since they were never in Bairds. Is this a reliable source? Where do we think their content is coming from? Rublamb (talk) 16:16, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Found this disclaimer: "HonorSociety.org Inc., Honor Society Foundation Inc., and its president Michael Moradian were sued in federal court by PTK on April 20, 2022 for False Designation of Origin, Trade Dress Infringement, and Unfair Competition. Honor Society and Michael Moradian countersued and are presently defendants/counter-plaintiffs in this litigation. Litigation is still ongoing and all claims made regarding this case are just allegations against the parties". Rublamb (talk) 23:13, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Updated list: notability or no ref tags

[edit]
Delete: I added two sources but can't find significant coverage. Content has sources now, but mostly from its website. It is now included in both the African American and LGBTQ list articles, with a source. Rublamb (talk) 07:04, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: can't find secondary sources Rublamb (talk) 20:13, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with List of Greek umbrella organizations
Delete: no off-campus sources, founded in 2007 so no history to look for
Move: the law firm does not meet notability for an organization. However, there are enough sources for an article on the Anti-Hazing Hotline. So, one option is to move the article and subject, with a redirect for the law firm which manages the hotline. Or, we can go with a new article on the hotline. The newsletter, the original focus of the article, is not significant.
  • Mu Epsilon Theta (1 chapter (at one time 5) social, *zero* secondary references)
- Found a few references. Need to add: from News.google. search "mu epsilon theta" catholic. Naraht (talk) 00:23, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Only other sources are mentions of brides or graduates being members. The one secondary source is a local newspaper that quotes a member who says it is a local that has existed for 30 years and has 1000 alumni. The bulk of its content is from the group's website. It is now included in List of social sororities and women's fraternities Rublamb (talk) 23:50, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete?: I added some sources and expanded/updated the chapter list. However, all of the sources I found are clearly from press releases. There is almost zero presence of this group on its host colleges' websites; I even found one that lists this as a non-recognized organization. A Reddit discussion notes that the group has used a copy of UNC's letterhead without any affiliation. Now that I have expanded the chapter list, I hate to say this--but it does not really meet notability. I suggest including it in the Honor society article but going for an AfD unless one good source shows up. Rublamb (talk) 01:01, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Veljesto, its website is its only source
  • Wren Society (local honor society @ William & Mary, references needed, but 191 years old, so should be *something*)
Merge into College of William & Mary secret societies; I've searched the state library, the VA newspaper database, and the usual places and can't find off-campus sources. The logo and some info seem to be pulled from its Facebook page. Rublamb (talk) 22:13, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox fraternity

[edit]

I was going to wait until the November rollup report to remove the discussed fields from Infobox fraternity but was getting frustrated by groups adding their mission statement back as fast as I removed it. So, I made the bold move yesterday and updated the template (and related instructions). To the best of my knowledge, all removed fields were not being used when I deleted them. However, @Naraht has since found one infobox that still had a mission statement. Hopefully, that is the only outlier. Rublamb (talk) 10:55, 29 October 2024 (UTC) bac[reply]

Note that I did not merge the gods and saints. That involves adding the new Divinity field and moving the existing data over to it. Rublamb (talk) 10:57, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm still hesitant on merging the Patrons, but that's a separate discussion. As for the Mission, I saw Category:Pages using infobox fraternity with unknown parameters and worked my way backward to seeing the change on the infobox. I'm not totally sure that a page will automatically show up if the page stays the same and the infobox changes, but we'll keep track.Naraht (talk) 13:27, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I generally concur. Question: given that various editors are quick to restore their mission statements (et al), some are likely to use a free field to restore that content, if the mission parameter doesn't work. Do we have consensus to remove those free fields, too, when used for this information? I simply want to be consistent. Formerly, I thought short mission statements were fine, but with so many of them expanded to long, wordy paragraphs I have become convinced that it is better to omit these, as they are available on most societies' websites. Jax MN (talk) 17:39, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am hoping most are just filling in all fields and will not think of it when those fields are no longer an option. Yes, we should remove any mission or vision statements added via a free field since the WP's decided not to include these in the Infobox. (My next project is to find free fields being used for our newly added fields). I am not going to look for our original discussion, but we concluded most mission statements were too long for the infobox and that there was little value to their content. Through the cleanup project, I found only five or six that were short. Keeping the short mission statements and removing others was going to see arbitrary unless we were going to start counting words or characters and, of course, the long ones were returning.
I am so grateful for the rollup report because it made it easy to merge the fields that represented the same thing, i.e. charter place—birthplace, etc. The librarian in me finds it very satisfying to have a consistent syntax. This was long overdue and, now, all references to Kalieiscope are now gone! Rublamb (talk) 18:05, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that we had not resolved that one, which is why I left it for now. Rublamb (talk) 18:06, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concilio Interfraternitario Puertorriqueño de la Florida

[edit]

According to the State of Florida, Concilio Interfraternitario Puertorriqueño de la Florida filed papers of dissolution in 2013. Its website is dead but it has been posting on Facebook. It may have ceased operations as a formal nonprofit and is now an informal group. Should we remove the Concilio Interfraternitario Puertorriqueño de la Florida template? Rublamb (talk) 03:47, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If it was once notable, it is still notable. I think, keep it. Jax MN (talk) 07:44, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Notability is qustionable. Its article had no sources until I add its archived website and the Florida nonprofit registry yesterday. Rublamb (talk) 08:12, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds like an AFD is in its future. Primefac (talk) 12:55, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I guess we can wait to address the template if/when there is an AfD. Rublamb (talk) 00:15, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested article section

[edit]

Instead of needed articles hiding as redirects or redlinked items in the WP watchlist, what do you think about creating a page for requested articles? Here is an example Wikipedia:Requested articles/Arts and entertainment. Rublamb (talk) 18:57, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested? Maybe Potential articles. That way, any if the former redlinks that have been dropped may be listed there, with potential. I know I can dig deep to find them, but am unsettled over the fact that for most casual readers and researchers, these names are down the memory hole, which could likely lead to name duplication from new groups over the coming years. Jax MN (talk) 19:22, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We can do some more research to see what other WikiProjects call these pages. I too am guilty of adding to the watchlist, only to realize later that the GLO does not and will probably never meet notability. Different sections could distinguish between needed/notable, plausible, and unlikely (locals or defuncts and not in Baird's, for example). All I know is, some that fall under needed/notable were not in red on the watchlist because of a redirect and, therefore, were not standing out as important and easy to put together. I think could solve that problem and also address your concerns. Rublamb (talk) 20:44, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I made an Articles for Creation page for the WikiProject. My attempt to organize its content is not set it stone but is just to get us started. Rublamb (talk) 23:39, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sab Club

[edit]

A draft for Sab Club was declined about a week ago. I think I have expamded the sources and content enought for notability. Can someone else take a look and publish if you think it now passes. I am being cautious in case someone claims it still relies too much on campus newspapers. Rublamb (talk) 21:33, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Fraternities_and_Sororities&oldid=1257584957"