Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zeta Phi Rho


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was Keep and cleanup. Deathphoenix ʕ 15:01, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Zeta Phi Rho
I nominate this article for deletion because I believe it lacks the importance to be a wikipedia article, in any case, if it is rewritten, perhaps it could be kept. Anyway this article has had many POV problems and disputes in its short history and I would like everyone to have an opinion. Francisco Valverde 13:20, 3 March 2006 (UTC) --Francisco Valverde 19:11, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep and Cleanup, as much as I dislike frats they are notable, and this article is more than just a stub, although I don't think the listing of the original members needs to be there. -- Thesquire (talk - contribs) 14:31, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. As per Talk:Zeta Phi Rho, ΣΧ, ΣΝ, ΑΦΑ, etc., all list their founders by name. (This is a big deal to frats apparently.) This page is a good deal shorter and to the point than those are. I don't know what Francisco's problem is. He's not weighed in once on the talk page and the "disputes" basically boil down to his slapping "Totally Disputed" and "Not Verified" templates on it repeatedly when all of this stuff shows up on the various chapter web sites at their respective universities. There's even discussion on POV on the talk page that Fransisco never expressed an opinion on. MARussellPESE 15:51, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
 * There's been consensus in the past to delete local greek organizations; this one is on the cusp. It's not a national organization, but it's slightly more than a local. All of its chapters are in California, which is a large state. The Loyla Marymount chapter is either underground or inactive and isn't mentioned on the website. I find no mention on the USC student orgs site, UC-Riverside, or UC-Irvine. I'm of the mind that they're making a good attempt at starting a national fraternity but haven't quite reached a state of notability yet. Delete.  RasputinAXP   c  [[Image:Gadsden_flag.svg|25px]] 15:54, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per RasputinAXP. Unless notability can be shown. -- Krash (Talk) 16:55, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep There is a consensus to delete individual chapters of national organizations but there has never been consensus to delete local organizations. Many local organizations have articles on Wiki (e.g. Alpha Chi Alpha, The William Penn Society, Kappa Kappa Kappa) I actually tried to nominate several of them for deletion but they have all survived AfD therefore the consensus in past AfD noms usually falls on the side of keeping these articles when they are local. Zeta Phi Rho technically isn't local but it is not national either. It is what's called a "regional" fraternity. I personally know members of this organization. MARussellPESE is correct in that Francisco Valverde should've used the talk page and dealt with issues there before putting this article on AfD. I've worked on many fraternity and sorority articles and I honestly can't see how the present article is POV. -- † Ðy§ep§ion † Speak your mind 18:04, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: All of the local greek org articles I've seen on AfD the last 4-6 months have been clear deletes. The three you've mentioned are notable for several reasons: Alpha Chi Alpha and Kappa Kappa Kappa are some of the oldest independent fraternities in the country (and AXA's former affiliation with my own organization is interesting, and probably contributed to some of the changes in it in the 60s, but I digress) and The Penn society's age makes it notable as well. I'm not arguing POV on this AfD, just lack of notability. RasputinAXP   c  [[Image:Gadsden_flag.svg|25px]] 18:37, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: I agree. Perhaps actually the POV is correct, but I do not find the article notable enought and apart of that; what does the article tell us? Not a lot. Philosophy and History section are not saying much...
 * Comment Interesting. Thanks for bringing up those past AfDs. At best then it can be said that there is no consensus about whether to keep or delete locals (I wish there was either way). I argue notability because I've known this organization to be well known among the Southern California greek community. Aside from the usual "fraternity stuff" I recall they have initiated several important philanthropies concerning the Asian-American community. I heard of them even before I was even in college. From personal experience, they are a lot more notable and a far more dynamic organization than many locals I've come across. Having several chapters denotes notability IMHO. I'm just having a hard time understanding how a regional fraternity with 8 chapters in some of the most well known schools in California lacks notability. Unfortunately though I can't and will not add info to the article because it would come under the scrutinity of verifiability and original research so take what I said with a grain of salt. -- † Ðy§ep§ion † Speak your mind 19:19, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per arguments above. There is nothing wrong with articles on frats and other school groups. -- JJay 19:40, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
 * keep please this org is notable Yuckfoo 00:14, 4 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I would like to add a futher observation. The only source at the External link section, which is the Zeta Phi Rho homepage (no independant sources), has to be access through a username and password. Therefore no external link for most of us. --Francisco Valverde 20:19, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Check out some of the chapter webpages, they're not as draconian about security -- Thesquire (talk - contribs) 06:14, 6 March 2006 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.