Talk:Alpha Phi Delta/Archive 1

Cleanup
The article if rife with deadlinks and non-sourced areas. Needs a cleanup pretty badly. Jmlk17 23:02, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Ratings and Importance
I have changed the class and importance of the APD article due to the recent improvements to the article and APD's membership in the NIC. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.15.105.49 (talk) 00:05, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:APDBROTHERCREST.jpg
Image:APDBROTHERCREST.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:33, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:APDBROTHERCREST.jpg
Image:APDBROTHERCREST.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 01:41, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

cleanup tag for tone
The sections "The Beginnings" and "The Founding Years" are written more like narratives rather than an encyclopedic article, and require some copyedits to reflect a more formal style. See WP:TONE. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 15:26, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I believe I have cleaned this up, as asked for. Burg (talk) 20:39, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The tone mentioned still needs a little more cleanup. What is meant is the glowing phrases used to describe the fraternity, etc. Phrases such as "pledge process has been known to thoroughly challenge", and "its prestigious pledge program". The article should be written factually and straight forwardly, without resorting to glowing adjectives to describe its activities. This is why it is usually a good idea to have people who aren't involved with an organization write such articles, so it may be done dispassionately and as NPOV as possible. Hope this helps. Heironymous Rowe (talk) 21:26, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
 * One of the reasons that those words are used to discuss the pledging period is that if you ask any Fraternity or Sorority that these are thing that are kept most secretive and close to each brother/sister.Burg (talk) 17:41, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Chapter listings
I've re-removed the chapter listings. It's reasonable to list individual chapters that may meet Wikipedia's guideline for notability; but an indiscriminate list of the chapters is not appropriate for a Wikipedia article on the fraternity. They have their own website for providing directories of all their chapters. Wikipedia is not the fraternity's webhost nor is it a yellow-pages directory. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 15:29, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Significance is the guideline for inclusion in an article, not notability. Notable chapters might (or might not) deserve their own articles. Rich Farmbrough, 17:33, 28 April 2010 (UTC).
 * (Which is not to say that that the chapter listing is significant.) Rich Farmbrough, 17:38, 28 April 2010 (UTC).
 * So is that a contradiction to what User:Barek stated?  Should I be able to have a listing of chapters for the Fraternity? Burg (talk) 17:46, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
 * According to SAL, (with emphasis added by me):"Each entry on a list should have its own non-redirect article in English Wikipedia (which in turn requires list members to meet the appropriate notability criteria), but the existence of an article is not required if the entry is verifiably a member of the listed group, and it is reasonable to expect an article could be forthcoming in the future. The one exception is for list articles that are created explicitly because the listed items do not warrant independent articles: for example List of minor characters in Dilbert."It is my view that the chapter listing should be permitted as it is essentially the constituent parts of the parent group, which is notable.  NYCRuss   ☎  22:38, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
 * That guideline still requires that each entry either have its own article, or have reliable sources that could be used for verifiability to demonstrate that the individual chapter could meet notability requirements even though an article does not currently exist. Thus far, I'm only aware of one chapter with its own article (currently being reviewed at AfD) - and none of the other chapters have had anything other than an occasional primary source linked from the proposed list addition here. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 22:45, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: If independent sources can be found that can meet verifiability requirements, the formatting cleaned up, and the external linking issue resolved - then the list could potentially meet WP content guidelines ... but in its currently proposed form, the list just hasn't been a viable addition. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 22:51, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Alpha Phi Delta. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927105835/http://www.apd.org/about/about.php to http://www.apd.org/about/about.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 19:27, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Alpha Phi Delta. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080219091416/http://apdnyc.org/apd/ to http://www.apdnyc.org/apd/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:58, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Pledging / other stuff
I don't understand why people keep deleting things out of this article. There are meaningful and truthful contributions that are being mad e to this page weekly that are being reset. Many brothers are putting time into this page, and laymen are diluting their efforts. When editing or refining this article, please explain your reason and justification for doing so. Let's make this a habit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smartbbboy (talk • contribs) 21:12, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * What exactly are you referring to? Things are often deleted because they either make no sense, or are obvious vandalism or blatant lies. Jmlk17 22:49, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * After looking over the page history, I don't see any wrong doing on the part of those who are reverting vandalism. A lot of the work the so-called "laymen" are doing is standardizing the content of the article and keeping it pure of vandalism. Samwisep86 23:19, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the search Sam :). Jmlk17 23:20, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Please don't get defensive. Adjusting the content of the "lies" or what have you is completely subjective. Do you know the history of APD? I recently added a sentence or two about how apd has kept its pleding practices, unlike many other nationals. It was deleted a few days later...Why? Probably someone didn't know their facts. Citing fraternity history is rough business; not many written sources can be cited (if any). I will try to get APD's National Historian to clean up this page. Before anyone wants to "clean up" or do anything to this page, please just post it first and let it sit for a few days!

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smartbbboy (talk • contribs) 14:46, 26 May 2007 (UTC)


 * How about this, I am a national Officer for APD, Vice President for Undergraduate Affiars, I am currently changing the page to the best of my abilities, so how bout if you dont hold any kind of position, dont touch it...thanx agian, Fraternally, Kola —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrapd26 (talk • contribs) 17:28, 2 January 2008 (UTC)


 * vandalism is always going to happen. luckily, we have brothers like myself who will constantly keep checking the page to make sure no one will try to mock our fraternity. there would be no need to add information about our fraternity to the page, the brothers will do that. all i ask that you do is if you see any forms of vandalism on the page, that you please remove it immediately. thank you. jason —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.160.239.44 (talk) 06:05, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Citation for Honorable Brother Ray Mancini
The award of an honorary membership is published in the Alpha Phi Delta Kleos V 80 No 3 Summer 2009, page 9 *PDF --BrandanLloyd (talk) 16:46, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Citation for Honorable Brother Frank Sinatra
I have a PDF file of the Newspaper article that has a photo of Frank and brothers from Gannon College awarding him brotherhood status. How can I attach that for this. --Burg (talk) 14:56, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

The award of an honorary membership is published in the Alpha Phi Delta Kleos V 38 No 1 Oct 1967, page 1. *PDF --BrandanLloyd (talk) 16:38, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

The honorary membership is also on the Sinatra homepage, under the OTHER AWARDS, HONORS AND ACHIEVEMENTS section --BrandanLloyd (talk) 16:38, 21 October 2010 (UTC)