Talk:Honor society

Time to review redlinked orgs again
I reversed the good faith removal of redlinked groups by @Drmies so that WikiProject Fraternities and Sororities can review and discuss. Are any of these groups on the WP watchlist? Do any meet the WP's guidelines for notability? Rublamb (talk) 22:12, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
 * And I reversed yours. We cannot have these local, non-notable, redlinked clubs listed without any evidence of notability. While we're at it, these colors should also be removed: tables are bothersome enough already without this kind of trivia. Drmies (talk) 22:13, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Not all that you removed are local groups. Just one reason to pause and review. Rublamb (talk) 22:19, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Hey, thanks for the "per Wikipedia guidelines"--per Wikipedia guidelines you should not drop spam links for non-notable organizations in article space. The edits I made were only "controversial" because you insist on keeping redlinked groups without any proof of notability in that list. Drmies (talk) 22:23, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
 * If you check the archived discussions for this article, you will find that I have previously removed more groups from this article than you did. Several editors have worked on this article; it is reasonable to give them chance to review this content in question. Although members of non-notable groups often add their society's name to a list article like this, a citation to a university website is not spam and is considered reliable in most situations. Rublamb (talk) 22:47, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
 * The question is "What level of notariety is needed to be in this article".
 * ) Equal to that of what would be needed for an article
 * ) Lesser notariety, above existence, but needing something unique (length of time of existence?)
 * ) Existence only.
 * I'm fairly sure it isn't #3, but I'm trying to get a feeling for what it would be less than #1.Naraht (talk) 00:05, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Naraht: I think WP:NLIST provides the best answer: "The entirety of the list does not need to be documented in sources for notability, only that the grouping or set in general has been. Because the group or set is notable, the individual entries in the list do not need to be independently notable, although editors may, at their discretion, choose to limit large lists by only including entries for independently notable items or those with Wikipedia articles."
 * Next, I suggest referring to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Fraternities and Sororities/Watchlist#Project Notability Rules. Longevity of the organization is worth considering. In the past, we have removed groups whose only source was the society's website, but have allowed groups with a strong presence in university publications or media. In this batch, there is also a dormant local group. Do we want dormant local groups in this list? Rublamb (talk) 00:45, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Or do we want to keep it simple and stick with project-wide convention of listing only entries with articles (we do that for schools, for hospitals, for alumni), and certainly not include entries whose only "reference" is a link to the organizational or university website that (perhaps, barely), proves existence? Like, at the bare minimum, how about we include only things that have a modicum of secondary sourcing that proves something a bit more than existence? Or, we keep to convention and, rather than confer legitimacy to clubs like the NSHSS who charge $70 for nothing, keep it encyclopedic? "A strong presence in university publications or media" is going to require a lot more than an organizational link to a Student Life directory, and how would you prove that anyway? Right--with secondary sources, unless you are going to present a whole bunch of links to university pages and say "this proves a strong presence etc," which would of course violate WP:SYNTH. Drmies (talk) 01:18, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
 * , you're a GA editor and you are going to claim that "R.P.I. White Key to Stage Dance" somehow established encyclopedic notability onto a university club? Drmies (talk) 01:23, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Drmies: I made no such claim. My addition of a newspaper article source in this instance is not to prove encyclopedic notability but to confirm the society's existence and verify that it was known beyond the university. Based on the criteria established by the WP, this can be useful information, especially given that some groups lack coverage other than their website or social media accounts. This source is not intended to be a definitive answer but something to consider. I find the WP F&S editors to be thoughtful and experienced; please give this some time to resolve. The issue is bigger than just the groups you identified. Rublamb (talk) 01:49, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
 * No one questioned "existence". "Known beyond the university"--quoting a local newspaper in a college town, that's not helping, and we actually don't need to consider those kinds of sources at all. When you say "the criteria established by the WP", I think you mean the WikiProject, but that has no authority to go beyond normal conventions, let alone guidelines and policies. Drmies (talk) 01:55, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I will requote from WP:NLIST: "Because the group or set is notable, the individual entries in the list do not need to be independently notable, although editors may, at their discretion, choose to limit large lists by only including entries for independently notable items or those with Wikipedia articles." Thus, the WP does have authority to limit content in lists such as this based on a criteria it establishes. This is not overiding Wikipedia's guidelines for article notability, but stating how the WP evaluates groups for lists and for article creation; it also informs which articles to nominate for AfD. Just because something is not helpful to you, does not mean it will not be useful to someone else. Please give a little grace and trust in the process of collaborative editing. Rublamb (talk) 02:09, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Please tell me whether this is OK with you. I'll just let it stand, OK? Drmies (talk) 01:39, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Following is a list the redlinked groups currently in the list, along with the status of their citations after I did a quick search of Newspapers.com. Can someone check to see if they are in Baird's 19th or 20th. I had no luck in the 17th edition. Rublamb (talk) 19:09, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Activities Honorary Society, Local, university website only
 * Alpha Eta, National, its website is the only source (Should there be more on a national?)
 * Alpha Iota Sigma, National, its website is the only source (Should there be more on a national?)
 * Alpha Mu, National, 2 college websites
 * Beta Sigma Kappa, National, website and 3 newspaper articles
 * Bucket & Dipper, Local; website, university website, newspaper articles
 * Chi Tau Epsilon, National, two newspaper articles in addition to own and college websites
 * Chimes, Local, university website only (Baird's 20th, VIII-39)
 * Dean William Tate Society, Local, university website and one newspaper article
 * Delta Epsilon Tau, National with 12 chapters, website and two inductee newspaper articles
 * Gamma Nu Eta, National, 2 college/chapter websites (No website for national group)
 * Iota Tau Alpha, National, website and one inductee newspaper article
 * Mirrors Sophomore Honorary, Local, website and university website
 * Mountain, Local, four newspaper articles
 * National Business Honor Society, National, several newspaper articles
 * National Chinese Honor Society, National, website and one newspaper article
 * National Society of High School Scholars, National, website and a significant newspaper article
 * Nu Lambda Mu, National, website and article in a journal
 * Pi Delta, National, one chapter/college website
 * Pi Epsilon Tau, National, 2 newspaper articles (enough for an article draft)
 * Plumb Bob, Local, one newspaper article, extensive coverage in 80+ editions of school yearbook, and in technology department portals.
 * Rho Beta Epsilon, National, its website is the only source (Should there be more on a national?)
 * Romophos (inactive), Local, website and inductee newspaper article (Do we want inactive local groups on this list?)
 * SALUTE Veterans National Honor Society, National; significant coverage in newspapers (enough to create an article)
 * Sigma Nu Tau, National, website and one newspaper article
 * Sigma Phi Omega, National, its website is the only source (Should there be more on a national?)
 * Skull and Bones, Local, its website is the only source (does Baird's mention the former Penn chapter of the Yale group that became this local? Not the 20th edition.)
 * SPHINX, Local, university website
 * Tau Upsilon Alpha, National, website and 2 newspaper articles
 * Tiger Brotherhood, Local, university website and newspaper article
 * White Key Society, Local, university website and minor news article
 * Recent societies, formed after 1991 and the publication of Baird's 20th will obviously not be in the book. Generally, Baird's avoided listing local societies sometime after the 8th edition.  Thus most of these locals weren't listed there, though they are notable.  Listing these locals here is beneficial for the many companies who research unfamiliar names on resumes, noting that a person was so honored.  I strongly favor maintaining this list of local honor societies of multi-decade tenure.  Deletionism, here, doesn't make Wikipedia better.  Jax MN (talk) 19:48, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Colors in table
@Drmies has questioned the inclusion of organizational colors in the tables. I moved the color boxes from the bulleted list to the tables because we did not reach a consensus on whether or not to include them when I started that project. But I am open to revisiting that topic now, especially since this is the only article in the WP that has color boxes. @Jax MN, I know you put effort into that project some time ago. Do you want to weigh in on this? Rublamb (talk) 00:49, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
 * While it is the only one with color boxes, the member as opposed to former table has the colors as well, I'm leaning toward a single answer here. Naraht (talk) 00:58, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Among the various types of fraternities, >90% of honor societies exhibit their colors for recognition purposes in the form of graduation regalia and on other occasions. I think it reasonable then to offer a quick, encyclopedic reference source to these colors for members and onlookers. Graduation photos are so widely distributed and reprinted, showing stole or cord colors, that such a reference is quite useful to a wider audience than just collegians and academics. Jax MN (talk) 08:17, 16 June 2024 (UTC)