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 (87)
  2. missing |chapters= - Category:Pages using infobox fraternity with missing chapters (29)
  3. missing |members= - Category:Pages using infobox fraternity with missing members (834)
  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)

Rublamb (talk) 17:49, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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]

Notability or No Ref Tags Project: Update 2

[edit]
Delete: can't find secondary sources
Merge with List of Greek umbrella organizations
Merge into Collegiate secret societies in North America#Yale University
Delete?: Some sources added and 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) 02:00, 15 March 2025 (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]
Restored from archiving to keep this on the radar Rublamb (talk) 20:33, 5 March 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]

Inactive essay

[edit]

The essay Wikipedia:WikiProject Fraternities and Sororities/Notability is noted as dormant because the discussion about it ended before it was approve. Do we want to revisit it? Rublamb (talk) 11:14, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I commented on that article's talk page. Thanks, Rublamb, for the extensive organizational work you have done on the project's pages. Jax MN (talk) 21:46, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
IMO, the NFRAT article focuses on Greek Letter Organizations (or closely related like FarmHouse) based at colleges. The recent expansion of the WikiProject to include groups in Eastern Europe, in Africa or were never college related (Loyal Order of the Moose, etc.) means that we almost need to start from Scratch (and based on that, it may make sense to move groups like Loyal Order of the Moose to a different Wikiproject.Naraht (talk) 23:41, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In its current form, the essay does not set limitations on the type of fraternal organization or a requirement to have a Greek letter name or a collegiate connection. The article is inclusive of "fraternities, sororities, and other Greek letter organizations" and "college Secret societies and student clubs". General and community-based fraternal organizations are covered by the terms "fraternity" and "sorority". The recent WP expansions that are not specifically mentioned (and should be) are honor and literary societies. Defining notability and the scope of the WP are two different topics that should be covered in two different essays/pages. Rublamb (talk) 00:54, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Naraht brings up a reasonable point where other editors may inquire as to scope.
To summarize for readers, here are the cut-off points which logically could make sense for us.
1. Every notable group, past or current, which has or had a Greek Letter name, and those operating as such. (Acacia, FarmHouse), AND literary societies, AND secret societies, AND those in the Masonic family. This includes community-based fraternities, and non-collegiate military fraternities. We could aim to identify these globally.
2. North American only: Every notable group, past or current, which has or had a Greek Letter name, and those operating as such. (Acacia, Farmhouse), AND literary societies, AND secret societies, AND those in the Masonic family. This includes community-based fraternities, and non-collegiate military fraternities. BUT limited to North America.
3. N.A. and collegiate only: Every notable collegiate or once-collegiate group, past or current, which has or had a Greek Letter name, and those operating as such. (Acacia, Farmhouse), AND literary societies, AND secret societies. DISCLUDING those in the Masonic family. DISCLUDING community-based fraternities, and DISCLUDING non-collegiate military fraternities. Limited to North America.
There is a dormant project for Collegiate secret societies in North America, and a vigorous List of Masonic Grand Lodges (start there, many sublinks. We've only scratched the surface of these). But to my knowledge, there ISN'T a project for literary societies. We've picked up the collegiate ones, but there are examples of non-collegiate literary societies that have existed in the US since 1849 which we've not picked up. Nor is there a project or list of ancillary organizations to the Masonic fraternity: We (Freemasons) call them either Appendant Bodies or Subordinate Bodies. There are many, many hundreds: These include the Shrine, the Scottish Rite (which in some countries is a de facto grand lodge), and stretching further, non-Masonic groups like the Odd Fellows or Woodmen of the World. There is no home for military fraternities, besides us. Nor for community-based groups like those in Indiana (Tri Kappa) or the various new LGBTQ groups, mostly non-collegiate. We started with the Puerto Rican and Philippine collegiate fraternities, added fencing fraternities in Europe, then the gang-like Nigerian confraternities. We are looking for consensus on where our project draws the line of inclusion.
Which path do we take? We could blaze a trail to be trackers of ALL fraternal activity globally, tracking every group in option #1 above. This appears to be our current heading. In this, we'd aim to create the definitive list. Not voting yet, but I personally like the clarity this provides, so that groups choosing a name don't tread on others with the same name. Or, Naraht may be right, that a split is necessary; maybe the Masonic project needs a push to create a list of their subordinate / auxiliary groups. There may be some 5,000 individual Degrees, jurisdictions or groupings of degrees that have current or recent activity and which are part of the Masonic world. Counting just grand lodges alone, (first three degrees, some geographical bounds) these number maybe 2,000 themselves. That would offload some of our work.
FWIW, merely on grounds of clarity I would rather not lose track of Greek letter groups outside of North America. I'm more comfortable offloading the Masonic entities, because they have an active project group. I could be convinced to limit our scope to collegiate only. Jax MN (talk) 03:00, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I really want to keep these as two conversations and projects--scope and notability. The Notability essay should be fairly easy as we are just supplementing the well defined Wikipedia guidelines. I am going to restart scope as a different thread. Rublamb (talk) 03:21, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I wanted to circle back to this. @Jax MN, could you merge your more recent list into the essay? I like the idea of this content being in an essay, rather than a Talkpage discussion. We will be able to link the essay through a tab, making it more visible. And I still think we can update the essay without bringing in the wider conversation on what is included under WP:FRAT or, at least, with an agreement to ignore that issue for now. If we are not going to update the essay, it should be AfD, but my preference is to update it. Rublamb (talk) 16:32, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I will. My regular duties interfere, but I'll get to this. Good idea to make it a tab. Jax MN (talk) 21:31, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Another Higher Honor Society Level and rearrangement?

[edit]

In Category:Honor societies, we have Category:High school honor societies (possibly to be moved to Category:Secondary school honor societies ) and then the main category is for Collegiate honor societies. Given the existence of groups like Alpha Omega Alpha, it feels like Honor Societies should be split into Four subcats with *most* of the organizations in the main category moved to a undergrad collegiate category and Alpha Omega Alpha either moved into a category with in a grad collegiate category or a subcat under that. There will be groups that cross some of the four subcats. Mu Alpha Theta belongs in both Secondary school and two year and ACHS will cross at least two year and four year (Psi Beta is two year) but it is unclear to me whether now that Alpha Omega Alpha is gone whether ACHS includes organizations that are only at post graduate schools. like Law Schools and Med Schools (Phi Lambda Sigma in pharmacy)Naraht (talk) 19:40, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if we have any articles for middle school/junior high school honor societies or GLOs. but "secondary school" would be a more inclusive term than high school. I am thinking about groups like the Beta Club that cover both high school and middle school. Rublamb (talk) 02:16, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Date sort issue

[edit]

A zillion sources later, I finally have dates for all chapters in List of Sigma Gamma Tau chapters. The society does not appear to have a charter date for Saint Louis University and it is not included in Baird's. However, this chapter hosted the 1970 convention, so "Before 1970" is the closest I can get. How do I navigate the date template with the phrase "before"? I believe everything else is sorting correctly. Rublamb (talk) 19:12, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Another of our editors may have found a technical sort workaround, but I've occasionally used a 'less than or equal to' symbol, prior to the tag.
So: ≤{{dts|1970}}. Jax MN (talk) 19:26, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
you can add format=hide as a last parameter in the dts template and it will be hidden, so for example, {{dts|April 1, 1970|format=hide}}Spring 1970 will sort as April 1, 1970 but show Spring 1970. Just decide where you want it sorted and what text you want to show.Naraht (talk) 19:44, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Much better. How would you set up the Boolean string to search our many Project tables for ≤, ≥, ⟨, and ⟩, in order to update that metatext to the 'hide' parameter? I've used this syntax a couple dozen times. Jax MN (talk) 20:31, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That works great. Thanks for the tip. Rublamb (talk) 20:23, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Went through, the only one with one of the symbols immediately prior to the {{dts is Alpha Gamma Upsilon and that is in a closing date, not an initial chartering date, so no effect on the sort.Naraht (talk) 17:37, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dropping list of GLOs from University articles...

[edit]

For changes like https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=University_of_Redlands&diff=1266148006&oldid=1263326808 , what is the procedure? Naraht (talk) 16:59, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't even have to look up the editor to know who did this. Honestly, I am pretty burnt out on fighting this individual who has been gradually doing to to every university article for a least a year. WP:UNI is not very active but its members have agreed in various discussions that Greek life belongs in university and college articles. Also, GLOs are part of the WP:UNI content guidelines for articles. However, there is no guidance on how must info to include. I think we have discovered that the WP:UNI editors do not like the lists of every organization and no one thinks a generic statement about there being fraternities and sororities is helpful. Trying to find the middle ground, I have made a suggestion that got support but no guidance on how to incorporate it into practice or WP policy. Unfortunately, this editor continues to remove GLO lists instead of improving or converting lists to text.
My suggestion was to replace lists with a Greek life text section uses U.S. News & World Report's data on percentage of students that belong to GLO, a summary of the number of and types of organizations, and mention of any nationals that formed at that college. Other unique items, such as notable architecture or campus traditions can also be included. It is also reasonable to include more information if the campus has a large percentage of students in GLOs vs. campus that have a low GLO presence. In other words, a section that is appropriate to the campus rather than all being the same. We also need to lean into secondary sources, not just the university's website.
Conversations about this issue have mostly been on the talkpages of various articles. I can't remember if we (Jax MN or I) posted on the WP:UNI talkpage but that might be one approach. We could also contact Elkevbo directly as this is the most dominate of the WP:UNI old guard who supported some GLO content in university articles. In the past, I have also suggested trying to figure out a way to add the Greek life sections of university articles to our watchlist so that we will know when edits are made. Unfortunately, we randomly run into these, mostly after the edits have been made. Almost every time we spotted the talkpage message announcing the pending nuking of the Greek life section, we have been successful in minimizing the damage. Of course, since you are new to this, maybe you could persuade this editor to post on WP:FRAT whenever a problem is found so that we have a change to fix this, realizing that WP:FRAT has to accept that the long lists or tables need to be addressed to find common ground. Rublamb (talk) 20:14, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Jax MN: Any thoughts? Rublamb (talk) 08:58, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is a mess. Melkor, (Damn, I did it again), MELCHIOR, continues his/her attempts to delete these sections and much other standard and broadly accepted content from university articles. These aren't just pot shots, or random attacks by an unthinking Deletionist. But neither do they follow a methodical pattern, supported by consensus. It appears his/her campaign is a sporadic one, just the work of a single person confusing "being bold" with their narcissistic impulse to destroy what he/she doesn't understand. Each deep culling has the same ill intent, to pare down college and university articles to the barest skeleton of what they were, making the "summary" about the institution an anemic summary-of-a-summary. I don't know why; we aren't running out of space, and these articles ought to flesh out the topic so to provide a valid and useful sense of the campus. Many, many experienced editors have taken the opposite course in building up the articles, Wikipedia being a work-in-progress. By relegating these articles to only the dry bones, they clearly lose their effectiveness as summaries, making Wikipedia poorer. I'm sure Melchior thinks they are helping, even if they are acting on their own, far outside of consensus by the F&S project or the University project teams.
To unwind this will require a methodical review of all the campus articles that this person has touched. Jax MN (talk) 19:32, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fixing entries for 20th ed of Baird's

[edit]

I fixed occurances of 20th edition, but I will also be changing the ISBN for that book once I get the correct entry. I'm not sure what is incorrect, but it is throwing an error for that ISBN in the checkwiki runs. I'll change them all. (No other ISBN in wikipedia shows up up as wrong more than 4 times, this one is over 40, I think. :)).Naraht (talk) 17:15, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For Baird's, I started with the citations from Baird's Manual of American College Fraternities because that was easy. No idea how my version got corrupted from 20th to 20h--thanks for catching that. I have fixed my code sheet so that won't happen again.
I am not sure that is going on with the ISBN as I don't really know what checkwiki is checking against. When I search for 0963715909 in Wikipedia's Book Sources, it provides the correct Google link to Baird's 20th. This may be a case of a correct number that the system doesn't recognize. Many times, I have noticed that it only recognizes one of the two ISBN numbers. Is there a way to add this ISBN to the entry that checkwiki uses? If not, try changing one from 0963715909 to 9780963715906 and see if it passed checkwiki? Although, technically the ten-digit ISBN is the correct one for a book from the 1990s. Rublamb (talk) 19:46, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure. https://isbnsearch.org/isbn/0963715909 clearly says 20th edition of Baird's. And both should be equally correct. the first 9 digits of the isbn-10 is in the isbn-13 with the 978 prefix (which is default, 979 is for when the 978 is used up, the last digit is a checksum. So unless the checkwiki is simply saying *all* ISBN-10 should be changed to ISBN-13 then I don't know what is going on. (And I just used https://www.loc.gov/programs/preassigned-control-number/isbn-converter/ to check that the hyphens are in the right spot for 0-9637159-0-9)Naraht (talk) 19:57, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW, neither my copy of the 20th nor the 19th editions have an ISBN listed in the colophon, nor elsewhere. The 20th once came with a dust jacket which may have had it, but that has long since been lost. The colophons for each book do however state the Library of Congress number. My template ISBN citation uses 978-0963715906, with the hyphen and the last digit as a 6. Let me know if this ought to be changed. Thanks all! Jax MN (talk) 22:51, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If it was published with an ISBN, it would have been the 10-digit version and probably was on the jacket (it took longer to get ISBNs back then and the jacket was the last thing printed) ISBNs did not start having 13 digits until 2007. They went back and assigned 13-digit numbers to older books. It is so annoying that World Cat does not include ISBNs in its public portal but, in general, Google, Amazon, and Abe Books are reliable. Rublamb (talk) 00:15, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm convinced the ISBN-10 is correct, we just need to understand why it got flagged. I may put it in for the autodetect of hyphenation and it doesn't hurt to go with the ISBN-13 instead...Naraht (talk) 02:21, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

I think we've long since decided that fraternity should be lower case in most cases, so instead of Sigma Alpha Epsilon Fraternity, we do Sigma Alpha Epsilon fraternity. However the question is Society. So which of the following: Phi Beta Kappa Society, Phi Beta Kappa society or Phi Beta Kappa society, or simply Phi Beta Kappa? We also have situations where Phi Beta Kappa Society is placed side by side with groups like "Periclean Literary Society", Is Society capitalized consistently there?Naraht (talk) 19:13, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think we decided that society/fraternity would be capitalized when being used as part of the group's formal or full name. So, Moo Moo Fraternity Inc. or Cow Cow Society in the lede and maybe the first mention in the history section. I would drop to Phi Beta Kappa rather than Phi Beta Kappa Society in the rest of the article as that is its common name and the name of the article. With a group like "Periclean Literary Society" where society is in common use as part of its name, I would expect to continue using Periclean Literary Society (capitalized) throughout as that is still the formal name. However, I would use lower caps for "the society's colors are black and white" because that is not its formal name. Does that help or did I just muddy the water? Rublamb (talk) 20:01, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Other than once in the header of the page and on pages like List of college literary societies drop it more or less everywhere. So I've got some "Phi Beta Kappa [Ss]ociety" entries to clear out.Naraht (talk) 22:25, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am on board with this plan, as noted in Naraht's first paragraph on SAE. Since Greek letters are so indicative in context that we are talking about some sort of society, fraternity or sorority, I don't see a need to include that additional word in the Wikilink. However, if it is part of the formal name, we should at least use that once, in the lede or first descriptive paragraph versus the "common name" we use in the infobox. Finally, regarding the example of Periclean, it would be less obvious to casual readers that this is a Greek-like society, or a literary society. I favor continuing the syntax using Literary Society also capitalized, as this is the group's formal name, but also because in this case, by including "Periclean" we are defining a particular literary society; in legal, formal, or technical writing, this "term of art" earns the clarification of capitalization. When used generically, lower case is correct. Jax MN (talk) 22:48, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IUPUI

[edit]

Since Indiana University–Purdue University Indianapolis split into Indiana University Indianapolis and Purdue University in Indianapolis in July 2024, we have a number of chapter lists that need updating. Unfortunately, we will have to research each case to determine if the chapter closed or moved. Rublamb (talk) 22:46, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Baird's 12th, 1930

[edit]

Baird's Manual 12th edition (1930) is now available through Hathi Trust. I have added it to our referenced list. Since the book is out of copyright, its illustrations can be uploaded through Wikimedia Commons. I have only used it for one GLO; so far, it has chapter info that is not in later editions of Baird's. Rublamb (talk) 23:58, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be honest, I squeed a little on this one. While founded in 1925 my fraternity, Alpha Phi Omega, was not in the 1926/1927, which is fair. I posted a link to the pages for APO to our History Facebook group. Note, there are *several* things in there to confuse the average brother today. :)Naraht (talk) 19:25, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Year only in lede

[edit]

As a general rule, I think that the lede should only contain the year of founding (and merging and defunct), with the date if known going in history, agree?Naraht (talk) 19:16, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I totally agree. Glad to find out this is not just my opinion. Rublamb (talk) 19:34, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As the lede paragraph is a summary of the entire article, and ought to be a brief one at that, this makes sense as a general style point. I'd proceed with that style unless there was some important (notorious?) and external historical reason to tie it to a specific date, like a sorority formed on Christmas Eve while snowed in, or a fraternity formed on the Fourth of July. Jax MN (talk) 19:19, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I took a quick look at the fraternities and sororities of the NPHC. Of the nine, eight had the date (Month Day, Year) of founding (the one in the infobox) in the lede. Sigh.Naraht (talk) 20:29, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As I have been working on items in the new report, I keep finding problems like this. Also, articles with no secondary sources when the group is easily found in Baird's. Rublamb (talk) 22:50, 15 February 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]

Ways to show "families"?

[edit]

If a four year honorary also controls a similar subject two year honorary, a high school honorary and a junior high honorary (not sure any single one example covers all) is there any appropriate way to link them other than "See also"? I'm not sure any of the examples have enough groups to be a category.Naraht (talk) 12:55, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There could be a section (Related organizations) mentioning the related group(s) with a main article link. With some, we may need to look at merging the two articles, especially if sources are thin for the secondary school group. I can think at least one (currently in our list of articles that need sources) where this may be the best solution. Rublamb (talk) 03:40, 11 March 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]

Requesting comment on Template talk:Fraternities and sororities

[edit]

At this point, I think we should make sure it is limited to only active groups. See Template_talk:Fraternities_and_sororities#Only_active_groups?. Naraht (talk) 15:14, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Samahang Ilokano

[edit]

Could others keep an eye on Samahang Ilokano. See the history, and User talk:Ilokano Pride. (Large POV pushes and a language situation I don't get). I know you all consider me the "Philippine fraternity master", but this is getting annoying.Naraht (talk) 14:21, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Fraternities_and_Sororities&oldid=1280619553"