Talk:Pi Alpha Phi/Archive 1

Non-neutral article?
I think we need to evaluate this article, as it seems to have been written from a non-neutral POV and reads like a recruitment brochure. The history section is quite lengthy, as is the section on its mission statement. Also, I don't recall seeing lists of conventions and national officers on other greek letter organization pages. Lastly, at least half of the "notable alumni" are not even notable enough to show up in Google searches.

Cleanup 07/10 tag
Was going through some information and saw that controversy page on lambda phi epsilon has been removed through discussion by C.Fred. "San Jose State: The fight involved members of both fraternities, the victim was a Lambda, but the assailant was uninvolved. Unless context of a wider rivalry between the Lambdas and Pi Alpha Phi is demonstrated, remove." Hence, following transitive property, we are removing the controversy section from our page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Etao77 (talk • contribs) 16:49, 10 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Doesn't quite work that way, restored content. Justinm1978 (talk) 02:21, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Cleanup tag
This page is constantly being edited by anonymous users who cut-and-past text from the ΠΑΦ website. The text is POV and often first person plural ("we"). There is another anonymous user (possibly from a rival fraternity) who has repeatedly vandalized the page. Thus I have added the cleanup tag. — Lovelac7 03:41, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

Cleaned up the page a bit. There were a lot of random, irrelevant links. Please see edits. Iheartwiki19 10:52, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Fixed some spam? Don't know the proper wiki word but paragraphs were just being repeated over and over.

Apr 1

==

"BEAUZ (DJ)" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect BEAUZ (DJ). Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. signed,Rosguill talk 18:53, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

San Jose Controversy
Edited out the section that said Long Duy Tran was not a part of either organization in the fight. Neither citation said that this was the case. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.210.237.169 (talk) 09:21, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Why is the San Jose incident in the Lambda page but not this one? Especially when the Lambda brother was clearly the victim of the incident? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rommeltw (talk • contribs) 10:11, 19 February 2009 (UTC)


 * It used to be on this page as I recall. But someone deleted it without any reason.  I'm sure it was a pi alpha phi member, and that's fine, because no one likes to have controversy on their wiki page, but at least provide a reason why it doesn't belong on here (but yet also belong on the lambda phi epsilon page)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Charles 2k4 (talk • contribs) 10:27, 19 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Lambda Phi Epsilon removed its entire contraversy section. 148.87.1.167 (talk) 22:24, 21 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Removed controversy section. Identical "san jose" controversy section regarding San Jose State Lambda Phi Epsilon was removed from that wiki article. If the article is on one entry, it should be reflected on both pages. (119.128.21.23 (talk) 10:49, 19 January 2011 (UTC))

Revisiting the article in 2021
I think there are some glaring differences between the Lambda Phi Epsilon page and this one. I am OK with the San Jose controversy not being included in either since that seems like a neutral standard. However, as was mentioned previously, the article reads like a recruitment brochure. The overwhelming majority of the article is overly detailed and too much weight is given to the "mission statements". Furthermore, despite the Lambda controversy sections taking up half the article space, there are zero incidents listed here. This doesn't seem quite right considering half the chapters in the list of chapters are suspended.