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 January 2025)

[edit]

The main list of infobox issues can be found at Category:Fraternity articles with infobox fraternity issues.

  1. missing image size - Category:Pages using infobox fraternity with missing image size (88)
  2. missing |chapters= - Category:Pages using infobox fraternity with missing chapters (41)
  3. missing |members= - Category:Pages using infobox fraternity with missing members (822)
  4. missing |colors= - Category:Pages using infobox fraternity with missing colors (230)
  5. missing crest or coat of arms - tracked at petscan
  6. Missing country
  7. CleanupWorklistBot: https://bambots.brucemyers.com/cwb/bycat/Fraternities_and_Sororities.html (updates weekly on Tuesdays)
  8. Needs color boxes (Helpful link, has colors, flags, and addresses of Baltic, Scandinavian, German, and Polish fraternities)

Active editors on the cleanup project:

Naraht (talk) 11:34, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Rublamb (talk) 17:49, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Jax MN (talk) 19:47, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Country

[edit]

Is it possible to create a category for infoboxes that lack a country? I have tried to fix all but may have missed some. Since country directly connects to scope, it seems like an important field. Rublamb (talk) 21:05, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't a problem adding code to the Infobox to determine whether the country field has a value. More or less the same code as missing chapters. But Country isn't really intended for scope, it is part of the address of the headquarters. If there is a group that was once strong, but has gone down to four chapters, three in the US and one in Canada and doesn't have a physical Headquarters, I think that we'd be doing the group a disservice by writing a value in there. As a note, given the Parameter report, 960 of the 977 infoboxes have values for that parameter. If you'd still like that as a Cat, bring it up on the template talk page.Naraht (talk) 09:18, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I guess I was thinking that a scope of national has little value if you don't know if that is for the US, Germany, Canada, Puerto Rico, or the Philippines. But I do get your point that it is part of the address. On the other hand, it would be an easy way to identify infoboxes that lack an address. Rublamb (talk) 14:52, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Frankly, I'm fine with both having a check category for it (Do you want to put that proposal on Template Talk:Infobox Fraternity or should I?) *AND* changing all of the scopes to National-XX where XX is a country code, using North American for the US/CA/(MX?) groups and leaving the few oddballs (mostly that Canada/France and some of the European Umbrellas) alone.
RublambOK, I did it with a search [1] and there are 16 mostly defunct groups.  Done Rublamb (talk) 17:57, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Otoh, there are 84 groups [2] with country, but no city, which feels more broken. (and 27 of those are active groups)Naraht (talk) 09:19, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strangely, this list keep repopulating. After being empty, several move have showed up in the defunct list. With the no city list, I had completed about half, but the list now has more than its initial 84. Rublamb (talk) 23:13, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
These lists are exactly what I wanted. I will through them--the first one I went to needed other updates, so this may be a more involved project. Rublamb (talk) 18:10, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notability or No Ref Tags Project: Update 3

[edit]
Merge with List of Greek umbrella organizations
Comment: didn't find anything in newspapers
Merge into Collegiate secret societies in North America#Yale University
Delete?: Some sources added and the chapter list expanded. 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; one university 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. Even with expansions, it does not really meet notability. Suggest including it in the Honor society article but going for an AfD unless one good source shows up.
https://gpa.eastview.com/crl/elmundo/?a=d&d=mndo19571224-01.1.8&srpos=1&e=------195-en-25--1--img-txIN-%22Zeta+Phi+Beta%22----1957----- this article from 1957 from El Mundo mentions it was founded

Rublamb (talk) 18:03, 21 April 2025 (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]
Here's an exmaple I just found from a Swiss organization. Its full name is Katholische Deutsche Studentenverbindung Teutonia Freiburg i. Uechtland That roughly translates as "Catholic German Student Association Teutonia Freiburg i. Uechtland". All groups of this ilk (Catholic German Student Associations) use the abbreviation KDStV before the rest of their name, which is usually the city where the group is located. So, this organization's common name and the name used on its website is KDStV Teutonia. The name is not the city in this case because there is another group with the Freiburg name. Its English Wikipedia article is named K.D.St.V. Teutonia, with periods in the KDStV abbreviation. That appears to be non-standard.
With this example in mind, would you 1) use the full German name, 2) the translated name, 3) the German name with the prefix. I think we can assume that 4) number 3 with periods is clearly wrong.
In addition, would the related article by called Katholische Deutsche Studentenverbindung or Catholic German Student Associations? Rublamb (talk) 04:28, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Since this has come up yesterday in articles where the title does not match the infobox, can we revisit? Is our preference the foreign language article name with an English translation in the article and/or infobox (as a free field) OR English language article name with the foreign language name in the lede? I have been looking at foreign universities to see what is the most common practice. I am finding many English translations but also many still in Spanish, for example. I don't care which way we go but would like them all to be the same, instead of the current mix. Rublamb (talk) 20:38, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly, I'd like to copy the Situation at Free University of Berlin. English name as Article, English name as name in infobox and add a "native_name" to Infobox Fraternity. *But*, would we need sources indicating a specific name in English, or for that manner any abbreviation to CGSA?Naraht (talk) 20:52, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that this makes the most sense for the English version of Wikipedia. Good question regarding how we determine the translation. If the group has an English language version of their website (some do), that would be easy. However, most are just in German or Estonian, meaning we would be counting on Google translate or the like. It would leave us guessing as to Corp Berlin or Berlin Corp, for example. The good news is that once we figure out the umbrella group's correct English name, all of its members could be treated the same way. @Jax MN, maybe our new German corp contact could help? Rublamb (talk) 21:02, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Association for Women in Communications

[edit]

In looking at Association for Women in Communications, there is a wording that makes me believe the original collegiate professional fraternity (Theta Sigma Phi, later called Women in Communications]] is not exactly the same as the current Association of for Women in Communications. The text says, "In 1996 WICI was dissolved, and the organization was renamed the Association for Women in Communications." Clearly, the current group is not collegiate and does not appear to have chapters. Although, I cannot tell if this change happened with the switch to WICI or to AWC. I am trying to figure out if it makes sense to split the Theta Sigma Phi article from one or both of the later groups. Rublamb (talk) 00:55, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is another issue. I found a list of its current community-based chapters. However, we also have a list of the Theta Sigma Phi chapters this is long enough for its own article. If we don't split this article into Theta Sigma Phi and AWC, how what do I call the chapter list article? Rublamb (talk) 03:17, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Signet Society

[edit]

An IP user came in and did some edits on Signet Society and removed type = Final Club and I've reached back out to him, but I've also found https://www.thecrimson.com/article/1986/4/28/the-signet-society-pamid-all-the/ which indicates that at least as of 1986, that didn't apply *that* well to it. Ideas? (Literary?) Naraht (talk) 19:28, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

According to their website, membership is open to sophomores and up which fits Harvard's definition of a final society, as I understand it. Maybe content them directly? There is a contact form on their website. Rublamb (talk) 03:47, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Large lift task, possible at one point...

[edit]

Looking at the fact that the Delta Sigma Epsilon (sorority) article has quite a bit from the 17th edition of Baird's is it possible for us to create templates for each of the editions of Bairds that would simply take a page number(s)? Naraht (talk) 19:05, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See examples under Category:Specific-source templates.Naraht (talk) 19:40, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe. I have my own versions (based on the Wikipedia article on Baird's) that I copy, paste, and update as needed, so I understand the potential value. The advantage of a template vs. what I do is that the text would be assigned to the correct fields, rather than all being lumped in "other". One issue might be linking to the source of the publication—Hathi Trust, Google, print copy—especially since the citation templates seem to require a link to a webpage that simply does not exist for several of the editions we frequently use. Also, we will need to test to make sure these templates work with VE. Rublamb (talk) 20:01, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I figures the templates would start out with the examples in the Baird's Articles. It is just fine to have the individual templates generate things that would different from each other. 17th wouldn't have a link, 1st would have the link to wikisource and 12th would link to google. For example, (to abuse the entry in Phi Alpha (fraternity)).
{{Bairds20|IX-900-901}}
would generate
{{cite book | editor1-first=Jack L. | editor1-last=Anson | editor2-first=Robert F. | editor2-last=Marchenasi | title=Baird's Manual of American College Fraternities | edition=20th | year=1991 | orig-year=1879 | publisher=Baird's Manual Foundation, Inc. | location=Indianapolis, IN | isbn=978-0963715906 | page=IX-900-901}}

Naraht (talk) 16:17, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your naming suggestion is easy be able to remember! I am pretty sure I was the last one to update the pub list in the Baird's article but I will quickly review to make sure they are "correct". Playing with Phi Alpha and {{Bairds20|IX-900-901}}, it looks like this is one of those templates that does not work if added through VE (an issue for me). However, if it is findable through Template Search, it should work. At least, that seems to be the case. There are some templates such as "in use" that I still add through source editing. Rublamb (talk) 16:40, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The article's list should be fine. The only problem is the 2nd edition which is not found in any library in the US, other than a copy in the archives at Illinois which does not have cataloging. Thus, we don't know the publisher for that edition. But that is not an issue as there is no need to make an template for it. Rublamb (talk) 18:42, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'll live without that, we either don't have a {{Bairds02}} or we just specify what we can. I don't expect we have that one all that often as a reference.Naraht (talk) 01:38, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Rublamb, how did you learn that the 2nd edition of Bairds is unavailable in the US? Was this using a JSTOR search or something like that? I recall that my own university library had the majority of these editions. (I donated a copy of the 20th edition when it came out, back in 1991.) Jax MN (talk) 18:52, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What is known as the 3rd edition actually says "2nd edition revised" and is readily available. It is possible that this has cause a cataloging error that has persisted for more than a century. Regardless, the actual 2nd edition is not cataloged as a stand-alone volume by any of the libraries that participate in WorldCat (most of the academic and public libraries in the US and many international libraries). It has also not been digitized through the Internet Archive, Google Books, or Hathi Trust. This does not exclude copies from existing. It is possible that one of the libraries that has Baird's cataloged as a serial has a copy (you cannot see the specific serials holdings through the public form of World Cat). Also, U of I does not have it cataloged as a book but as an archival item and, therefore, it does not show up in World Cat. In general, if we cannot confirm the publisher of the 2nd edition via an online search, it is very unlikely that anyone would ever use it as a source for Wikipedia. And, I would hate to create a template that lacks publisher and place of publication. Rublamb (talk) 20:42, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pre WWII GLOs and addresses

[edit]

From looking at some of the historical information for the Jewish Fraternities in the American Jewish Year Book, I wonder whether for some of the pre-WWII GLOs whether they *ever* had a National Office, contact address appears to only be for the National President and for the National Secretary, with nothing that we'd consider a headquarters. In fact, I'm not sure why any part of addresses (nation should be in scope) are really needed in an infobox for a Defunct or Merged organization.Naraht (talk) 19:59, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I go back and forth on this. You already know why I think country has value, and I do believe all organizations should this data. The street address seems odd to me unless it was associated with a specific building on note because it is, in many cases, not accurate any longer ands therefor somewhat confusing. I have seen cases where someone has included the address but noted a date such as (as of 1941). That seems unhelpful as well. I don't have as much of an issue with city and state--it is informative but generic enough that it is not completely dated.
We do need to decide before I proceed on list number 2 in the cleanup project above. I had planned on adding city and state if findable. With a one chapter local, that especially makes sense. If the headquarters data is Baird's, etc., I would add that detail to the text the source and, then, include the last known city and state in the infobox. With a small group that never had a real headquarters or an unfindable headquarters, a country is all the data they would have. Does that make sense? Rublamb (talk) 18:49, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Number 2, I thought was missing chapters. I agree that country should be there somewhere, but without a headquarters, it seems much more appropriate to have as part of scope. I'm not sure of a good example of a non-local where the headquarters would stay in a city/state without an identifiable address. For a local housed fraternity, I figure the address. To boil it down to where it feels really out of place, Seven Society (College of William & Mary). That's less of a Headquarters than just a general statement of where it exists.Naraht (talk) 14:45, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
With your Seven Society example, I agree that this is a (useful) statement of where it exists which may or may not be its corporate location. Most of these groups are incorporated and have an official address used on their articles of incorporation and for tax returns; these can be found via GuideStar if one can determine their corporate name—but this does not mean that the group has a physical headquarters. And, of course, this de facto headquarters might change with each election of officers.
One aspect to consider is that the Infobox Fraternity fields are for Address, City, Atate, Zip/Postal code, Country--but display as Headquarters. In fact, it might be location, mailing address OR headquarters, with the latter only applying for the biggest GLOs that are active. Infobox Organization has the option for either Headquarters OR Location (location city, location country, additional location city, additional location country--no field for location state which is weird). I wonder if that approach would better suit our needs as well.
FYI, 2 above is regarding the country project, specifically Infobox Frat that have a country but lack a city. For GLOs that are active but do not have an address on their website or that lack a national website, I have been pulling the addresses from GuideStar. Mostly down to defunct groups now so will pause until we sort through this. Rublamb (talk) 16:06, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps we should have a parameter indicating what this geographic information covers with only some of the having location_info=Headquarters.Naraht (talk) 01:40, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Baird's = Encyclopedia?

[edit]

What are various member's feelings on whether Baird's Manual should be treated as an Encyclopedia in terms of doing a cite? Should we build around {{tlx|cite encyclopedia}} for the examples? Naraht (talk) 13:45, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What would be the significant benefit? Am I correct in assuming that the encyclopedia template just provides more parameters? Jax MN (talk) 19:18, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, and seems more accurate as well. Most of our references are to a specific "article" within Baird's about the GLO with only a few of the ones for Umbrellas not really fitting into that. Seems more accurate to say the article on Sigma Alpha Epsilon on page 432-433 than simply page 432-433.Naraht (talk) 20:15, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The availability of more information (parameters) would generally be a good thing. I do not know where, technically, this book series belongs. It is a reference of several editions? It is not a dictionary nor an encyclopedia, but is encyclopedic in attempted scope. --If not design nor syntax. So, what to do? Yours may be the best solution. Alternatively, I create unique versions of that standard reference citation whenever I use it, and have done so starting about a year when I first wrote it. (I think I wrote the original 19th and 20th edition citations we commonly use.) Anyway, when referencing the Archive as a citation I now add something like "Almanac of Fraternities and Sororities (Baird's Manual Online Archive), showing Alpha Phi chapters", then I list the specific page numbers, AND THEN, I complete the citation by providing a link to the MAIN archive home page. Jax MN (talk) 21:12, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not honestly sure *what* to do with the online archive. Given the relative ease of updating it sometimes it seems like a primary reference, but we use it as if it were an unchangeable 21st edition.
I have found some other entries in the Encyclopedic templates that are single volume.Naraht (talk) 00:58, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Encyclopedias can be a single volume; it is more about the content than length. Frankly, I have never tried to classify Baird's in this manner because I have always considered it to be a serial (but a publication can be both a serial and an encyclopedia). Technically, it is an limited topic encyclopedia. However, since the Baird's "articles" almost always matches the name of the Wikipedia article, I am not sure it is worth the extra effort use the encyclopedia citation. Either way would work for me.
The Almanac is a different critter; I have never viewed it as a fixed edition. We might want to treat it as a website so that we could easily add both publication and access dates. The citation format I have been using for the Almanac includes the most recent publication date; this makes it much easier to tell if there have been updates since the last time the chapter list was edited. We could have a template for each list within the Almanac: men's organizations, women's organizations, coed organizations, inactive men's organizations, inactive women's organizations, institutions, closed institutions. Then, simply update the publication and access date. Rublamb (talk) 01:33, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Another project

[edit]

Just made some upgrades to FIJI and was reminded of a problem that needs addressing. I keep finding articles like this that use all fraternity-published sources for the history section and that don't use Baird's at all. This problem seems to be specific to larger groups that probably created their own article back in the day. These article don't have notices noting the problem, so are not on our radar to improve. If you happen upon some of these older articles, please take a minute or two and see if they could be improved with Baird's, etc. If so, please added the {third party} or {Refimprove} so that we will know to circle back and review (these will show up on the weekly report once tagged). Rublamb (talk) 04:51, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of Oklahoma State University Greek alumni

[edit]

Should I put this up for AFD? If not, are there any other school GLO Alumni lists like this?Naraht (talk) 23:02, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think AFD, after making sure the various alumni are included in their GLO lists. It is unlikely that we can find a secondary source that discusses this grouping (GLO members from OSU). Rublamb (talk) 01:31, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also, let's not forget that we want to revisit all articles that still have "Greek" in their name. Rublamb (talk) 17:36, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Naraht: I just completed an article merger for this. Rublamb (talk) 15:56, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
thanx. I've I'm reading the diff from the edit before yours and now, only one new alumni was added: William Allen. Also, John Smith is now in two places, not sure if that was intended.Naraht (talk) 16:43, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Greek in Name

[edit]

From our watchlist, excluding redirects and dabs. KEEP indicates, I can't figure out why it would be anything else.

Naraht (talk) 16:56, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Should we consider merging List of Greek umbrella organizations and List of defunct Greek umbrella organizations? These are both short lists and we have both active and defunct groups on all other WP lists. Rublamb (talk) 02:35, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge first and then rename with Letter first?Naraht (talk) 13:33, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, if you agree that we should merge. Rublamb (talk) 17:12, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge proposed on the umbrella pages.Naraht (talk) 17:40, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I concur. Will you advise if there are any detractors? Knowing context, this should be broadly accepted. Jax MN (talk) 18:29, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It has already been merged. Rublamb (talk) 01:38, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Rublamb No it hasn't both of the Umbrella articles still exist.Naraht (talk) 12:28, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I was looking at the OK article at the top of the thread. I think we can proceed with the merger of the umbrella articles without discussion. Rublamb (talk) 12:52, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Take a look at the template at the bottom of List of Delta Upsilon chapters that provides links to the related articles. Do we like this format over a See Also section? Rublamb (talk) 17:35, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oddly, I think it would probably work better if DU had different fraternity colors.Naraht (talk) 21:26, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This would not have to be in the fraternity's colors, as that would not always be readable. I guess my question is more about have the template vs. using See Also. I don't event know whether or not this falls within the guidelines for templates. Is there a minimum number of items/links for a template? Rublamb (talk) 18:13, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Minimal for a template is 5 links, this has 7. Fraternity, chapters, members and four houses.Naraht (talk) 13:13, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That answers my question. Not many are going to have five links. Rublamb (talk) 02:29, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

merge_date and defunct_date

[edit]

Does it make sense for these to be wrapped with the template:end_date_and_age, just as founded is wrapped in start_date_and_age?Naraht (talk) 13:19, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I like the idea of merging the two into one. Another option is to look at the style of defunct colleges, which creates an entry like this: 1891–1921. That could still include the length of operations, such as: 1891–1921 (30 years). Rublamb (talk) 18:10, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I see what infobox University does, but I can't find any with the number of years active.Naraht (talk) 18:15, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Infobox univeristy does not include the number of years. That would be our introduction, if you can figure out the code. Rublamb (talk) 18:34, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

COI for Fraternity HQ on chapter lists

[edit]

User:Alpha Sig Communications just made a change to List of Alpha Sigma Phi chapters, provisional chapters, and interest groups. On the one hand it is *obvious* COI, on the other, the information isn't at any level of controversy. Ideas on how to reach out *and* what to tell them? Naraht (talk) 19:17, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As long as they are just updating status--and there appears to be sources-- I wouldn't worry about it. Now, if they start adding to the main article, we may have to watch more carefully. Rublamb (talk) 02:28, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW, I've had direct interactions with their staff and their historian. Both exchanges were quick, helpful and the Alpha Sig historian was able to immediately point out the resources I needed. Very competent group. Jax MN (talk) 18:26, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Categories: establishments and disestablishments.

[edit]

IMO, the establishment and disestablishment categories for GLO pages should (mostly) be of the form

and if appropriate

In terms of the disestablishments, I'm not sure in a situation where the first chapter was in Iowa, there are three chapters left at the time of merger, two in Florida and one in Alaska, what state should be used, so just USA and there are no categories for Student organizations in the disestablishment cats.Naraht (talk) 13:11, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. Rublamb (talk) 23:58, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Another thought: if the group is incorporated in a specific state, it would have a specific state of disestablishment. That is, where the paperwork is filed to legally end the corporation. In that case, a state of disestablishment category would be correct to include. Since we tend to use state of formation over state of incorporation for the establishment category, the disestablishment state might not be the same as the state of establishment. Also, not all states have a disestablishment category. In that case, I have used U.S. Rublamb (talk) 03:24, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In infobox, but not prose?

[edit]

Is there an appropriate template indicating information like the motto or colors which only occur in the infobox? As I understand it all information in infoboxes with the exception of images must also exist in the prose of the article?Naraht (talk) 16:56, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A "Symbols and traditions" section is a common catch-all for these items. Occasionally, mottos are noted in the History section of these articles. There is no template to track incidence of one or the other, or missing body text notation. Jax MN (talk) 17:19, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As I understand it, the infobox is a summary of the article's content, meaning that all of those details should be in the article with sources. I don't know of a editing template, other than to use {cleanup|reason=}. Using that would be helpful because it would show up in our weekly cleanup report. Rublamb (talk) 23:57, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merged (different ways of counting)

[edit]

I compared the Category:Merged fraternities and sororities with those entries with status = Merged from the param report. The following were different:

I *guess* other than the AES, the others should be added to the Merged Category.Naraht (talk) 15:38, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Are you fixing these or would you like someone else to do this? Rublamb (talk) 16:18, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
RublambIf you have an opinion on how each of these should go, go ahead. I'll see about putting a similar comparison for the defunct, but more complicated. I know AWS will give you lists with all cat & subcat members, which I think will be useful.Naraht (talk) 17:37, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Status of projects

[edit]

We are probably nearing a completion point with the original cleanup project (or as close as we can get to completion). The articles lacking sources or with notability tags have been pulled out as a separate list. At some point, we can let the cleanup list replace the notability/lacking source list, but I figure we can finish working on those we have already identified.

The related cleanup project for the infobox in still in progress. I have not been able to remove the deleted field "kaleidoscope" from the VE version without breaking the code; it was added differently (incorrectly?) from the other fields that I successfully removed. There are also new fields (merged date, etc.) that need to be added to the VE version. We stil need to decide if we are going to make changes to location/headquarters and dates (see infobox discussions).

I am not going to say the chapter list project is completed but most of those without a list have many, many chapters. One says it has 5,000 chapters. Most of those with format problems are huge lists that are in the old template; the size of the lists makes me question the value of spending time turning hundreds of notes into efn or merging tables for each state for example. If I could do the latter in VE it would go quickly but that is not an option with the old table format. If it was feasible to use Excel to merged and sort into date order, I have done that already; those remaining have many citations which would get lost in Excel. I will go through the list again and share those that are problematic to see if there is another solution.

The weekly cleanup list is getting down to citations needed, notability, questionable sources, promotional tone, and other similar problems that take time to solve but are major flaws in articles. These take longer to fix but it seems like important work.

We should be aggressive about adding {cleanup|reason=} or other tags such as {Third-party} when all of the sources are too close to the subject or Baird's is not used, especially since the weekly report makes it easy to find and address these or any other tagged problems. I mention these two--lack of a symbols section and no Baird's for older organizations--because these are two issues I keep finding and are really easy to fix. I mentioned previously that I have found many older articles on important GLOs have a heavy reliance on self-published sources and do not use Baird's at all.

At one point, I had improved almost all of the stubs under WP:FRAT; that will need to be done again now that we have expanded the list. We still have the Redlinked Institution list and Articles for Creation; those two could keep us busy for the rest of our Wikipedia lives. A thoughtful review of Article for Creation could prioritize subjects and identify those that are best represented with a redirect to an existing article. Speaking of redirects, we have identified a need to add redirects for the earlier names of organizations.

In addition, we previously discussed the need to write the WP article guidelines we have gradually developed so that others can join in the fun. There is also the essay article that needs updating.

Have I forgotten anything? Rublamb (talk) 17:23, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good summary, at first reading. I do agree that the WP article guideline, written in a tight fashion with clear examples will be most useful for posterity. Jax MN (talk) 19:42, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

University of Kentucky student life

[edit]

Trim and revert being dealt with. Additional eyes welcome. Just added primary source and the institutions pdf from the Almanac.Naraht (talk) 17:42, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I updated the list and added more sources. It is a bit concerning to see his focus shift from general university pages to this type of article. Oh well. Rublamb (talk) 23:07, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hazing subjects as notable members.

[edit]

From an edit on Phi Beta Pi which I have not reverted. If a person is on List of hazing deaths in the United States as having died by hazing by Mu Mu Mu, do they count as a notable member even if there is no page for them. Assume the entry on the List of hazing deaths in the United States is referenced.Naraht (talk) 23:55, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Some people in GLO notable lists are linked to redirects to related article, such as a band article for band members or a company article for its CEO. I usually let those slide, provided that there is a source about their relationship to the group, mostly because the person probably could meet notability on their own. With hazing deaths, it is less likely that the individual would meet notability. I would include them in the misconduct section instead. Rublamb (talk) 03:17, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Fraternities_and_Sororities&oldid=1293866310"