Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Fraternities and Sororities/Archive 12

Local chapter misconduct
IMO, these sections are getting *far* too filled with detritus. I just removed an entry in Pi Kappa Phi was about one student's actions and didn't even mention Pi Kappa Phi) IMO, entries added need to meet one of two characteristics (and I wouldn't be annoyed with requiring both). Comments?Naraht (talk) 19:51, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) The chapter at *least* loses school recognition. Charter Revoked, members Jailed, are of course well beyond that.
 * 2) The reference should *not* be to the school newspaper.
 * Thanks; these sections appear to generate a significant amount of unbalanced, non-encyclopedic bloat. In addition to your two comments, I'd add this:


 * 1) The sections themselves should be renamed "Local chapter or individual member misconduct" unless the issue shows a clear, and adjudicated example of systemic, national failings or even collusion.
 * 2) Items that made the national news in a significant way, such as the Stone Foltz death, or the fraudulent Phi Kappa Psi rape accusation at Virginia, may reasonably be called Notable, and continue in the article.
 * 3) However, minor news stories (Someone bothered someone ten years ago), which did not result in a closure or discipline, are not notable and should not be listed on a summary article about a national fraternity.
 * 4) For the middle ground, where there is/was some coverage in a significant newspaper, and where there was a closure or adjudication of some individuals, that may reasonably be placed as a footnote against the chapter on the list of chapters.
 * Without a systemic approach like this (and I am open to discussion), these articles attract unbalanced copy edits.


 * There is no encyclopedic value in keeping content about former students with whom an ongoing chapter has no further connection. Thanks for bringing this up as a discussion topic. Jax MN (talk) 20:22, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I'd actually prefer that "or individual member" *not* be in the header. Generally, unless there is more than one member who does something, the chances of it rising to national notoriety are *very* small.
 * The Stone Foltz death or the fraudulent Phi Kappa Psi rape accusation will definitely have references *far* beyond the school newspaper.
 * Agreed
 * Yes, having that as a note as to why is fine.Naraht (talk) 21:03, 21 November 2023 (UTC)


 * I'd be OK with removing the "individual misconduct" term from the standard header. In special cases we can add it.  I had originated the shift to "Local chapter or individual misconduct" in place of the onerous "Controversies" subhead that had crept in as a standard term, using the new language instead to redirect the framing and spotlight that these are typically, and almost exclusively the actions of a one or more bad actors or a self-destructive chapter; there is nothing controversial about hazing or sexual assault.  These actions are simply bad, and harmful, and uncontroversially so. Jax MN (talk) 21:24, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

1905 Baird's not currently on Wikipedia
Went through the table of contents of the 1905 Baird's and pulled out the groups we don't currently have. In this, if it doesn't say women, it is for men and Medical Regular implies *not* Homeopathy. I was surprised to see a General Fraternity we don't have an article on, but it had 6 or so chapters and disintegrated in 1907.

General

 * Omega Pi Alpha - General Men (on Watchlist)

Professional

 * Alpha Phi Gamma - Women Musical (not on watchlist, others with name are)
 * Alpha Delta - Women Medical (not on watchlist, others with name are)
 * Alpha Kappa Phi (law)- Legal (merged with Delta Theta Phi, section on that article)
 * Alpha Mu Pi Omega - Medical Regular (not on watchlist)
 * Alpha Omega Delta - Medical Regular (not on watchlist)
 * Beta Mu Delta - Biological (not on watchlist)
 * Delta Epsilon Iota - Medical Regular (not on watchlist, other with name is)
 * Delta Mu - Medical Regular (not on watchlist)
 * Epsilon Tau - Women Homeopathic (not on watchlist)
 * Eta Tau Alpha - Theological (not on watchlist)
 * Gamma Eta Alpha - Legal (not on watchlist)
 * Kappa Delta Epsilon - Women Musical (not on watchlist, other with name is)
 * Mu Sigma Alpha - Medical Homeopathic (not on watchlist)
 * Omega Psi - Women Medical (not on watchlist)
 * Omega Tau - Legal (not on watchlist)
 * Phi Alpha Sigma - Medical Regular (on watchlist)
 * Phi Mu Epsilon - Women Musical (not on watchlist)
 * Phi Sigma Psi - Medical Regular (not on watchlist, other with name is)
 * Phi Theta Chi - Medical Regular (not on watchlist, other with name is)
 * Pi Lambda Sigma - Women Library Economy (not on watchlist, other with name is)
 * Sigma Rho Alpha - Architecture (not on watchlist)
 * Sigma Tau Theta - Women Musical (not on watchlist)
 * Theta Lambda Phi (law) - Legal (merged with Delta Theta Phi, section on that article)
 * Zeta Beta Tau - Medical Regular (not on watchlist, other with name is)
 * Zeta Phi - Women Medical (not on watchlist)
 * I have added or corrected all of these, updating the Watchlist. Jax MN (talk) 19:57, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

Honorary Fraternity

 * Mu Phi Alpha - engineering, honorary (not on watchlist)
 * Phi Lambda Mu - chemistry, honorary (not on watchlist)
 * The immediately preceding listing is clearly a typo in Baird's 6th ed. While that name IS listed as Phi Lambda Mu, the badge AND body text shows the letters Phi Lambda Upsilon, an active fraternity which continues as a chemistry honorary, also founded in 1899, and at Illinois. --Too much of a coincidence to be otherwise. Jax MN (talk) 20:18, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

Inactive General

 * Alpha Kappa Phi (Not sure on watchlist, need to dive deeper)
 * Alpha Sigma Chi (Not sure on watchlist, need to dive deeper)
 * Delta Epsilon (Not sure on watchlist, need to dive deeper)
 * Kappa Alpha (UNC 1859 founding) (Not sure)
 * Mu Pi Lambda (on watchlist)
 * Phi Alpha Chi (Not sure on watchlist, need to dive deeper)
 * Phi Phi Phi (on watchlist)
 * Phi Mu Omicron (on watchlist)
 * Phi Sigma League (not on watchlist)
 * Pi Kappa Tau absorbed by Phi Alpha Gamma (not general, but apparently on list)
 * Psi Theta Psi (on watchlist)
 * Sigma Alpha (Black Badge) (not on watchlist)
 * Sigma Alpha Theta (on watchlist)
 * Sigma Delta Pi (Vitruvian) (on watchlist)
 * Upsilon Beta (on watchlist)
 * Naraht (talk) 22:42, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
 * At one point, I was working on the medical fraternities, but stopped after a couple. There are way more lacking per your list then I had imagined. Are this already redlinked in the WP watchlist? Rublamb (talk) 04:18, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I have added or corrected all of these, now on the Watchlist. Jax MN (talk) 19:57, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

The other day, I compared the defunct school list in the Almanac with Wikipedia and created a more comprehensive list colleges related to GLOa that need articles (in my sandbox). Along the way, I discovered several nationals that do not have articles. I was hoping your list has these covered, but we can add the following as needing articles too:
 * Sigma Iota Chi - (comment by Jax_MN: 2-yr college women's general? If so, it's on the Watchlist.)
 * Zeta Mu Epsilon - (comment by Jax_MN:2-yr college women's general? It's on the Watchlist.)
 * Eta Upsilon Gamma - (comment by Jax_MN:2-yr college women's general? It's on the Watchlist.)
 * Phi Mu Gamma - (comment by Jax_MN: originally women's general, but became women's drama, music, art, creative writing, and dance professional, you mean this one?)
 * Rublamb (talk) 04:18, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Added comments. It appears most of the general groups may be on our watchlist already, including a large number which appear to have been absorbed into Beta Theta Pi. Will dive deeper to give exact info. Most of the Professionals & Honoraries aren't in the watchlist.Naraht (talk) 16:21, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
 * , I reviewed the four you added immediately above this sentence, and have added my comments. If the four you mention are the ones I found on the watchlist, we're good.  If the ones you found were different from these, let me know. Jax MN (talk) 19:57, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
 * @Jax MN: am I correct that eveything listed above is now red-linked on our watchlist, meaning this discussion can be archived? Rublamb (talk) 19:48, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes. Jax MN (talk) 20:42, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Potential articles
As I worked on the stub articles for founders, I came across Ida Shaw Martin who was strangely missing from our watchlist. I suspect she is the only person to serve as the national president of two traditional GLOs and the national treasurer of a third. I also discovered another sorority that she founded which is not on our list: Psi Psi Psi, for the mothers of TriDelts. Two other potential articles related to Martin: The Sorority Handbook and Banta's Greek Exchange. Should these three be added to our list? Rublamb (talk) 01:22, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't know enough about Psi Psi Psi for a qualified opinion on whether they deserve an article or not. However, they should be listed on the watchlist, and probably deserve a section redirect, if the main Tri-Delt article discusses them.
 * As to entries for Banta's and for the Sorority Handbook, both are notable enough to deserve articles, and to be listed as part of the project. Baird's Manual is more important, but these two are solidly in the second tier.  Jax MN (talk) 21:51, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
 * With your agreement, I will create a redirect for Psi Psi Psi (because I doubt I will find a source other than the TriDelt website) and will add the publications to our list. I may draft those eventually. Rublamb (talk) 16:51, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I added info on Tri Psi to the Tri Delta article. But have decided to write an article for Tri Psi. I found a source with more details. Rublamb (talk) 17:12, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * @Jax MN: Although there is more to pull from newspapers, I went ahead and published Psi Psi Psi. Can you do your magic with the colors? Also, there is a photo of its badge on the Tri Delta Ottawa Alumnae source. Or an even better photo here. Thanks. Rublamb (talk) 19:42, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Done Jax MN (talk) 20:56, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Tri Delta
After working on Tri Psi, I noticed that Tri Delta lacks an image of its crest and pin. I know those are available somewhere. Also, I found a list of specific collegiate chapter charter dates in the Tri Delta Digil Museum and a list of historic alumnae chapters and dates. Rublamb (talk) 19:47, 16 March 2024 (UTC)


 * I am adding alumane chapters and dates, since this table had no dates. Rublamb (talk) 18:14, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

University_of_the_Philippines#Student_organizations
I was looking at University_of_the_Philippines, any ideas on improving the section other than blowing it up and starting over? I'm actually tempted to use a list *rather* than prose for this. (And as far as I can tell, the alumni mentioned are *from* the chapters at UP rather than elsewhere.Naraht (talk) 16:50, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I favor blowing it up and starting over. Figuratively, of course.  Yes, a list would be far better. Jax MN (talk) 17:07, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Probably should be removed entirely (including the section) since the article is about the entire system. This is equivalent to saying the fraternities and sororities of the University of California system. Besides, the same text (almost exactly, I think) is at University of the Philippines Diliman and needs fixing there.Naraht (talk) 13:57, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I removed it and some other content, after making sure this info was covered elsewhere. Rublamb (talk) 22:27, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Section heading for notables...
I presume since we've standardized on the articles being "List of Mu Mu Mu members" that the section header in the Mu Mu Mu article should be "Notable members" as opposed to "Notable Brothers/Sisters/Alumni".Naraht (talk) 13:04, 11 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Yes. Notable members makes the most sense as it covers all types of groups. Rublamb (talk) 16:40, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, notable members - Enos733 (talk) 17:17, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Will change as I have the chance. Help would be welcome. :)Naraht (talk) 17:45, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Oh, I have been working on it when I find them! Rublamb (talk) 18:38, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
 * For Fraternities, see https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=fraternity+insource%3A%2F%3D%3DNotable%2F+-insource%3A%2F%3D%3DNotable+members%2F&title=Special%3ASearch&ns0=1&ns1=1&ns2=1&ns3=1&ns4=1&ns5=1&ns6=1&ns7=1&ns8=1&ns9=1&ns10=1&ns11=1&ns12=1&ns13=1&ns14=1&ns15=1&ns100=1&ns101=1&ns118=1&ns119=1&ns710=1&ns711=1&ns828=1&ns829=1 (and then that can be switched to sororities).Naraht (talk) 19:15, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

Also
When doing this, check to make sure that if there is a page that is the main article, change it to the redirected name. So from to. Generally the redirect would be OK, but since the article name is shown, it should be changed from the redirected name.Naraht (talk) 19:21, 11 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Pretty sure I fixed the redirects when I updated the article names. At least, I am going to assume that I did that for now. Since the list generated from your query above pulled in way too many college alumni lists and my attempts at searching for "notable brothers" and "notable sisters" did not identify all name variations, I decided to work through the articles listed in our watch group. I am also checking the chapter list and general organization of the article at the same time, so this had now become a bigger project. But that I why I am randomly fixing articles or identifying more substandard chapter lists. Rublamb (talk) 12:38, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

Is a geographical split/ordering *ever* right?
From what I can tell from our articles, the first preference in ordering is a fixed chapter name sequence: Alpha to Omega, Alpha Alpha -> Alpha Omega etc. That may be something unique to the group, but if they are generally in a situation where the letters of the next chapter will be known, go with that. Second choice is pure chronological. But I wonder if in the situation when chapters are named "Alabama Alpha", should we *ever* have "Alabama Beta" after that if 15 chapters chartered between the two? (Thinking specifically of List of Alpha Epsilon Delta chapters)Naraht (talk) 16:10, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Each sortable column offers valuable options. In longer lists, where we add a separate state column besides the city, this will offer the reader the option to quickly find only the Alabama chapters, to your point.  I strongly prefer leaving the chartered/range column in order of formation.  Even if some chapter charterings go slightly out of strict alphabetical order.  Jax MN (talk) 22:42, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I prefer alphabetical order, if that's the intention. If we find out that Xi and Omicron chapters that are both 1931 were chartered on May 31, 1931 and May 30, 1931 respectively, I think they should be left in that order.Naraht (talk) 22:47, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
 * So this one is a work in progress and may prove to be an exception to our usual preferences for now. I started from scratch with just a list of chapters names and institutions; my original source was ordered by state and then alphabtical by chapter name. I updated the list to state/Greek letter order. As I started working on the list, I found some dates but not enough to create a list that would make sense to place in date order. Then I found a list in their magazine with better dates and, also, discovered that each chapter has a number. All of these details have now been added to the list. But there are still gaps that make an accurate charter order list impossible. In the meantime, the list can be viewed by (known) charter order by sorting by the number column. Unless someone can find older versions of their magazine, this one is a challenge. Rublamb (talk) 23:22, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

founded vs. founded on
"Mu Mu Mu was founded January 1, 1902" or "Mu Mu Mu was founded on January 1, 1902"? (Saw a correction from the second to the first and wanted to know if there was a preference.Naraht (talk) 16:44, 1 January 2024 (UTC)


 * I prefer the second version. Rublamb (talk) 07:28, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
 * No strong preference, but the second version is clearer (= better). Jax MN (talk) 19:31, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Why the letters were chosen, belongs in Infobox, elsewhere?
Let's say that Gamma Sigma Phi is a notable Honorary in the field of Geology and that the organization's public history on their website (and/or Baird's 1915 edition) says that the letters Gamma Sigma Phi were chosen because that stands for Geology Students Fraternity. It isn't the *motto*, but where does that belong?Naraht (talk) 14:54, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I think, where interesting or germane, this information would properly be placed in a "Symbolism" section, in a single line of body text. You are correct that it wouldn't appear to be a motto. Jax MN (talk) 18:15, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I would expect that 95% of the cases where this would occur would either be for Honoraries (where this could probably be gotten from the open publishing of the ritual on the group's website) or for groups in the Philippines.Naraht (talk) 19:31, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I have come across it in professional groups fairly often. I have included this info in the symbolism section. Rublamb (talk) 06:51, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
 * PFA groups? Can you give an example?Naraht (talk) 16:18, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
 * So for example, the sentence in Alpha Rho Chi with the meaning should be moved into a symbolism section from the Lede?Naraht (talk) 17:25, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Maybe. It should be in the symbolism section, but could be in the lede as well if that is a key fact. I randomly picked a professional group to look at, Alpha Gamma Rho. Although the article does not say this, AGR was clearly selected as its name because this is an agricultural fraternity. My favorite is Epsilon Psi Epsilon or ΕΨΕ which is an optometry fraternity. Rublamb (talk) 18:05, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I know some seem Obvious in both Professional or Honorary, but that would be WP:OR...Naraht (talk) 20:26, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, I agree that we have to find a source to include this in the article. Rublamb (talk) 20:28, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Missing Date.
Is it worthwhile to note in some way (make a cat???) for GLOs where the founding date of the Organization is not known? I'm thinking groups like Pi Alpha Tau.Naraht (talk) 16:20, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
 * There are very few of these. Delta Tau Delta is one.  If a separate category would spur on future research, it might be valuable. But one surmises that many motivated researchers have exhausted the available records. At least I assume this is so for Delt. Jax MN (talk) 16:58, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Yeah, The number of DTD motivated researches for that would definitely be non-zero, as opposed to Pi Alpha Tau.Naraht (talk) 18:03, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
 * It must be late and, to be fair, my cat is sitting on my lap. But I read "make a cat" literally for a second. Rublamb (talk) 05:02, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

dts and pages
I *think* I've worked through all of the DTS need pages in the last archive. Would appreciate additionals if you see them. Note, if a column in a table *entirely* consists of spelled out dates Example: So Row 1, January 1, 2000 Row2: April 2, 2001 and Row3: December 5, 1968 then it will work correctly (as the sort views them as dates), but if the dates contain things it can't figure out for that (197x or December 13-15, 1968), then the problem is there.Naraht (talk) 18:07, 22 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Fantastic. I had not included that list in the update because of your previous mention of the the "entirely" rule. With regards to the 197x issue: If it is 197x, should we used 1970s instead and use 1970 for the dts template? Or we could go ahead and estimate the date with circa. Does the dts template work with a circa notation? I suspect the 19xx are more problematic and don't have good answer for that. Rublamb (talk) 18:46, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Even 1970s causes issues. However, in general if we have a 197x (or 1970s) situation sorts probably don't make as much sense. More common would be Row 1: January 1, 2000, Row 2: Spring 2001, Row 3: September 1, 2002. At this point, my suggestion is that if you aren't sure, just click the sort in the column twice. If there is anything problematic, it will end up at the top after the second click (when it is doing the sort reversed). If the upside down sort seems OK, then it is probably all good without DTS for now. (Just about anything problematic will end up with a larger sort key than the generated ones.Naraht (talk) 18:55, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I prefer the 'good faith' effort to narrow the date to our best estimate where the actual year is not known, rather than just conservatively sorting to 1970 where we know it to be 197x. We often can get it to within a year or so, because most groups follow standardized naming structures and assign names based on when that chapter comes on line (not always, but usually). Therefore I prefer use of the CIRCA tag.  Jax MN (talk) 19:49, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Good idea. Not sure how well dts and circa with the sortable argument play together in a table, but I'll experiment when I have time.Naraht (talk) 19:53, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Search sort
I've been tracking a number of edits being made by a bot, where Talk pages are adjusted with a standard shell. In a couple of situations, the "listas" parameter has been removed from our Project line, which I assume will result in our losing that page when searching for that subject. For example, see this talk page edit for the list of Sigma Alpha Epsilon chapters. I've seen the bot make several hundred changes, mostly useful, but a scattered five or ten of them have removed the LISTAS param. Any need to have the bot code adjusted, to avoid this? Jax MN (talk) 18:34, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I also note that the bot has been removing the "Importance" parameter, which is normally used on articles for our Project. Jax MN (talk) 18:37, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I thought the biggest issue with this bot was that it has been cluttering my watchlist. Mostly I see the class removed and listed above the WP, with importance remaining with the WP where it was previously listed. However, since some articles have a prior version of a shell, importance was sometimes listed in the shell and not in the WP section. Add in the mix that some WP do not use importance, most notably WP Higher Education (this is probably a glitch rather than something on purpose but I have noticed that WP Higher Ed no longer saves correctly if importance is included). I am not sure which version/combination is causing the issue, but do think the bot should be discontinued until the problem is fixed. Rublamb (talk) 20:30, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I just wrote to Qwerfjkl's talk page, asking for an adjustment: that the "listas" names aren't lost, and that all effected articles have the class "list" as a line within the shell.  Jax MN (talk) 21:15, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
 * They clutter my inbox too, but apparently I have to review each one in order to maintain these for future edit alerts.
 * Qwerfjkl asked for specific examples of errors. I went back to my trashed alerts, and reviewed a couple dozen.  I didn't find an example where an article was stripped of a LISTAS param, but only that these were moved to the general shell.  I did, however, note that the list at Talk:List of Alpha Phi Omega chapters (chronological) didn't start with a LISTAS param, so the bot didn't add one.  This appears to be a redirect from an old name. Anyway, I then added it, as the article name started with "List of ..." and I assume wouldn't come up in searches correctly.  I also added a class=list param. Naraht (as a careful watcher of this particular group) may want to eventually delete this redirect as redundant, as both will now come up during searches. We should continue to watch for these alerts of banner shell creation, if only to add missing class=list and listas=(name) params. Jax MN (talk) 23:40, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Missing Listas
Naraht (talk) 20:11, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
 * chapter lists missing listas -
 * member lists missing listas -

AWB work
I went in and added listas, but some of them are dups to the banner shell. I don't think that hurt though. Now I need to fix the listas with "List of" in front that I created with my use of the magic word in the substitution.Naraht (talk) 22:31, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Improvements for dates in chartering tables...going inactive
Let us say there is a chapter in a table that is listed as "1950-1975; 2000-". Finding the date with reference for the date in 1950 that it chartered would definitely count as an improvement. Finding the date with reference for the date that it rechartered in 2000 is sort of an improvement. In general, how much improvement is finding the date that the chapter was declared inactive in 1975? (Presumably either the date of a board meeting or the date of a National Convention) Naraht (talk) 00:16, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I suspect there is little to no chance of an official report (even from the GLO) of a chapter going inactive; such things are just a part of Fraternity life. There is a small chance (though I have never seen it from my own) of a National Convention or similar publishing a "who went inactive this year" notice along with their other official documentation, but that would probably be as close to verification for inactivity as I can think of. The only other official notice I can think of would be the rechartering, which might say "...who went inactive in YYYY". Primefac (talk) 14:07, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
 * My fraternity includes the minutes of board meetings which includes chapters being declared inactive (null & void) See https://www.apoarchive.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Summer-2021.pdf#search=declared as a sample. So Zeta Tau chapter at Central Methodist University (for ex) could be noted as having the date of inactivity of April 29, 2021.Naraht (talk) 14:24, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Hrm, fair enough. I did just re-read your initial question, and I don't really think there's much point in having a specific date for inactivity (or even re-active), especially since inactivity is usually based on failure to pay dues and/or meet some other requirement, which may not strictly have a specific date attached. Primefac (talk) 15:20, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Newspapers include closure dates for misconduct. These dates makes sense to track (with an efn) when it is recent and the group can reactivate after a certain amount of time. I have accidentally found dates in chapter histories or fraternity publications and add them when found. Otherwise, I will use the year from Baird or the Almanac. I think inactive and recharter years are an important part of a chapter’s history, especially when there is a big time gap. But, in general, I don’t see a reason for the specific date. Rublamb (talk) 09:00, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Founding date -> chartering date of "Alpha"
Just remember, unless the fraternity/sorority's history indicates that "Alpha" didn't actually become "Alpha" until the group became a national, use the national fraternity founding date as the date for Alpha. An example, that I just changed was Kappa Sigma Kappa, so that the 1867 founding of the founding Gamma chapter, should be the national founding of September 28, 1867.Naraht (talk) 21:04, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Nu Kappa Epsilon
Could someone else please take a look at Nu Kappa Epsilon. I'm the only one of us to have edited it, but that's only for changes that get commonly made to a lot of articles. 4 chapter fraternity, no references other than primary. I've found https://flathatnews.com/2022/11/16/a-night-at-nkoachella-nu-kappa-epsilon-music-fraternity-brings-coachella-to-the-college/ but nothing else similar. Which way would you go on an AFD?Naraht (talk) 21:41, 18 February 2024 (UTC)


 * I did a deep edit, restoring and adding sources and removing fluffy and unsourced content. I doubt it would make it through an AfD but maybe it has enough to keep one from starting. Rublamb (talk) 05:36, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
 * But if you want to propose this for AfD, I would support your nomination. Rublamb (talk) 00:00, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Founder information.
See List of Alpha Tau Omega members, the Founders section. I've *never* seen any GLO that went into that much depth, How much should be trim it down? Naraht (talk) 19:36, 29 February 2024 (UTC)


 * I did a quick cleanup. I would prefer to merge the notable founders into the correct section by profession and remove the non-notables. A short bio on in the main article about each founder is fine, but this list is for people who are actually notable. Rublamb (talk) 07:23, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Corps Concordia Rigensis
I brought Corps Concordia Rigensis from German Wikipedia to English Wikipedia. The article was translated by Google, and I have only done a quick copy edit. It this good enough or do we need to tag it for a German editor to review? Also, does anyone know how to make the bar of colors for the infobox or is that just somethinng in the German infobox template? I will look to see if there are any others on our watchlist that have a note to translate. Rublamb (talk) 21:06, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Post WWII- Groups with National Closure.
I'm trying to think of national groups that have a specific date that the national organization simply stopped (post 1945). I'm not including Mergers (ex. Phi Kappa) or transformations (such as Sigma Gamma Chi or Lambda Delta Sigma). Naraht (talk) 00:15, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Pi Alpha Phi
 * Iota Alpha Pi (still not sure if they came back at Hunter)
 * SPURS National Honor Society


 * I know there are more. Can you use the defunct fraternities and sororities category? Rublamb (talk) 04:38, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Looks like Alpha Epsilon Iota and maybe Alpha Alpha Gamma qualify. (went through Category:Defunct_fraternities_and_sororities (oddly enough from Z to A)). The others were either local, pre-WWII or in some way, mergers.Naraht (talk) 13:20, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
 * What about National Collegiate Players? Rublamb (talk) 15:32, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Not a "specific date", the way the article phrases, it could just be the last known chapter went under.Naraht (talk) 15:54, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Weird situation
A national high school fraternity, Phi Kappa (secondary), last track of its founder and first national president in 1920 when the group was around five years old. Today, they honor him as their founder and have named an award for him. As I was working on expanding the stub about him, Jacob Broughton Nelson, I not only solved part of the mystery but have now confirmed it with the research of a Nelson family genealogist. As mentioned in his hometown newspaper, Nelson moved to the Dakotas. There, he became a bit of a con man, including a scheme involving selling stock for a stamp company. He lied his way into teaching Sunday School at the Episcopal church and into being a Boy Scout leader at the Catholic church. He then stole money from the Moose Lodge and ran away to Canada with a 15-year-old boy from his Scout troop. He was eventually caught by the Canadian Mounties and returned to America. He pleaded guilty to theft (I guess the charges for corrupting a minor, kidnapping a minor, and fraud were dropped) and served time in the South Dakota penitentiary. He was released from prison and disappeared again, probably unfindable because he again used an alias. So, is this a person that should be honored by a high school fraternity? Should I let them know? Rublamb (talk) 00:34, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * They may already know of this, and have buried the record thinking few researchers would ever bother to dig into the matter. Regardless, I would let them know so they might determine how to handle it.  Jax MN (talk) 07:00, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Phi Mu Epsilon
I am working on the stub article for James Hamilton Howe, founder of Alpha Chi Omega, and found this source which says he also formed Phi Mu Epsilon. Any suggestions where we can learn more. Maybe this was a local music fraternity? It would have to have been established before 1911 based on the source's date. Rublamb (talk) 18:24, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Eventually it affiliated with Mu Phi Epsilon, apparently. See https://books.google.com/books?id=xbU4AAAAMAAJ&pg=PA93 Naraht (talk) 00:02, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Great. Thanks for finding that. Rublamb (talk) 16:49, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Kappa Kappa Gamma chapter naming.
It *looks* like Kappa Kappa Gamma does something unique. The chapters that have rechartered (apparently including their founding chapter) are refered to as Deuteron. So apparently they were founded at Monmouth College, the chapter there went inactive and the chapter that rechartered there is referred to as Alpha Deuteron rather than Alpha. Should we Naraht (talk) 01:14, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
 * keep it the same, with Alpha Deuteron being the name corresponding with Monmouth
 * split it so that Alpha and Alpha Deuteron have different entries.
 * something else?
 * If they're going to the extent of giving a rename, then it sounds like they are treating it as a "new" chapter. If so, adding some sort of † as an indicator that this renamed happened would probably be reasonable. Primefac (talk) 15:13, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
 * @Naraht: JAX and I have been using a strategy for this very situation. Give each instance (Alpha and Alpha Deuteron) its own row. Then, create an efn for the later indicating that Alpha Deuteron was a re-establishment of Alpha, and an efn for the former indicating that it was re-established. In the chapter name field, add a "see" note. For example: Alpha (see Alpha Deuteron) and Alpha Deuteron (see Alpha). Rublamb (talk) 23:28, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Pi Alpha Phi
Could I get someone to be a second set of eyes on Pi Alpha Phi. Someone changed the "is" to "was" in the article and the national website says that all undergraduate chapters has closed as of 8/1/2023. I'm wondering if it should be moved to dormant organizations and how things should change otherwise.Naraht (talk) 12:55, 19 March 2024 (UTC)


 * I have confirmed that this is a dormant group. Still working on retoring some of the scandals that led to its dissolution and were previously removed from the article, according to the talk page. I have edited the article to past-tense and have changed the chapters to inactive. The fraternity lists its former chapters by intitution (no chapter names), so it is hard to tell if some on the list were chartered or if they were still colonies at the time of dissolution. I wll have to go through archived webpages to find out for sure. I will let you update the categories and watch list. Rublamb (talk) 18:13, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I have updated all of the GLO and university articles that mentioned PAPhi. I will contact the Almanac too. Rublamb (talk) 23:25, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Looking at this made me realize that National APIDA Panhellenic Association members aren't being grouped together in categories correctly.Naraht (talk) 23:39, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
 * What do we need to do to fix this? Rublamb (talk) 15:36, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Lambda Alpha
I am in the process of creating a chapter list for Lambda Alpha and need advice on the order of chapters. I have gone through all online magazines and newspaper articles to look for dates (which are lacking on the national website). I have contacted the national for info. However, the issue still remains that because of its naming by Greek letter/state and the lack of dates, it is not possible to order this list by date or an assumption of charter order. I currently have ordered the list alphabetically by state, then Greek letter order. Thoughts? Rublamb (talk) 15:05, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
 * One way to do this which I've seen is to list those that have dates first, in order, and then list the remaining chapters. Occasionally, members will look at their chartering records and offer a correction or addition, to improve the list over time. Jax MN (talk) 15:21, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
 * How would you order the remainng chapters? Normally, we would say alphabetically, but that may not make sense in this case. Rublamb (talk) 15:41, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Chapter 1 with date, chapter 2 with later date, chapter 3 with still later date, and then the chapters without chartering years/dates in what would be the natural order, in this case Alpha of Alabama, then Beta of Alabama, and then since Gamma of Alabama had a date, that would be followed by Delta of Alabama.Naraht (talk) 16:21, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I am getting decades from its journals. Slow going is the chapter list is randomly included and not always mentioned on the contents page. @Jax MN, can this photo of their key be used under fair use? Rublamb (talk) 19:45, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Sure. One image is allowable as a corporate identifier.  I use a crest if possible, and a pin or key if no crest is available. There is another process for adding both a pin and the crest, as long as the pin or key is discussed in body text, in a Symbols section. I'll take care of this one.  Jax MN (talk) 20:41, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Done. Jax MN (talk) 20:58, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I have ordered this list based on date, then chapter name. Can someone check through my work? Thanks. Rublamb (talk) 08:16, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Change to Template:Association of College Honor Societies ?
With the creation of the Honor Society Caucus, *but* with only four members, I don't think a separate template is needed. So my idea is the following. Make this template more like Template:North American Interfraternity Conference, in that former members should be split into Active vs. Defunct *and* additionally Active should be split within it in by a subgroup for the Honor Society Caucus. (sort of like Template:Drag Race España has an subgroup for winners). Naraht (talk) 15:57, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I support this. Jax MN (talk) 18:25, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Done, please take a look.Naraht (talk) 03:43, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Next possible Category Organization- Films!
There was a successful CFD for the renaming of Category:Films about fratricide and sororicide to Category:Films about siblicide. Unfortunately, most of the films there are Fraternity/Sorority Horror films which don't really belong. (I've reached out to the proposer)

However, more generally, we have Category:Films about fraternities and sororities with two subcats: Black Christmas (which is really a film and two remakes) and the Revenge of the Nerds series. There are quite a few other pairs of films that would be reasonable for Categories if there was a third film (Legally Blonde & sequel, Neighbors & sequel, Beta House & sequel), but I'm not sure there are any others with three films. As a *macro* split, I could *maybe* see the cat being split into comedy and horror, but that doesn't seem quite right and certainly leaves some out (School Daze if nothing else).

So any ideas? Any movies that you expect to see in the cat that you don't? Naraht (talk) 14:53, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Category:Films about fraternities and sororities in Watchlist?
Should the films in Category:Films about fraternities and sororities be added to the watchlist? While the category's talk page shows it as part of the project, the individual films under it generally aren't marked so.Naraht (talk) 15:14, 8 January 2024 (UTC)


 * I recall that there was a page that listed all the fake fraternity names used in movies. Four or five years ago there was a discussion about this, and the fake names were removed, with some dissent.  Were they removed from the category page?  This occurred before I expanded the Watchlist, which is now 5x larger. I wasn't really invested in the discussion, as a newer editor at the time, so I didn't weigh in.  But today, I'd say these are probably worth tracking, as an aid to reduce confusion, and to help those planning for new local (or movie) names in avoiding copyright or trademark problems. Jax MN (talk) 19:25, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Phi Kappa Phi
I went to add a couple of new chapters to Phi Kappa Phi and realized that Phi Kappa Phi lacked a chapter list and had a long member list in the main article. I took care of the later, removed some puffery from the article (more help is still needed), and am working on the chapter list (help is welcome). However, this brings up the need for some new categories: Cat:Phi Kappa Phi members or Cat:Phi Kappa Phi, and Cat:Honor Society Caucus. I know we have Cat:Lists of chapters of former Association of College Honor Societies members by society, but with five articles to link to Cat:Honor Society Caucus (four members plus the HSC article), it seems worth it. Do we also need a Cat:Lists of chapter of Honor Society Caucus members by society? And @Naraht, can you do your magic with these categories? What was supposed to be a brief diversion from the Alpha Iota chapter list is almost as bad as that project. Rublamb (talk) 02:55, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Magic done. No Sigma Xi chapter list, so no Sigma Xi cat. I think I've got the rest put together. Naraht (talk) 13:48, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Fantastic! I guess Sigma Xi goes to the top of the list. Hoping we don't have to look up each chapter individually to get data. Two in a row like that is killing me. Rublamb (talk) 15:55, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Lo and behold, Sigma Xi had provided a chapter list in Baird's 20th. I sent you several JPGs, .  Jax MN (talk) 16:48, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
 * That will help, but it will be a while before I get to it. Phi Kappa Phi is a mess. You go to one place to get Greek letter names, another to get number and charter state, and a third to get current status. And the latter two involve looking up by individual chapter. Rublamb (talk) 19:32, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Bouchet Graduate Honor Society
I found Draft:Bouchet Graduate Honor Society waiting for approval. I have made some additions (inlcuding chapter list) and general cleanup of puffery. It could be better but I think it is ready to publish. Will someone take a look and publish if ready? Rublamb (talk) 03:52, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Moved to mainspace. Not quite sure how to describe, but looks good enough with refs.Naraht (talk) 17:01, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Honor society
What can we do with Honor society? Can this data be moved to a table? Should we include affiliation and status, like with have done with other fraternal lists? Also, a new article showed up in our notice board: Ku Klux Klan Honor Society. Guess it should be added to the watch list? Rublamb (talk) 19:53, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Wow. Good catch.  The article is rather fairly written and researched, from what I can tell.  I hate to see them "in the club" of our watchlist, but suppose that treating it like any other dormant honor society would be reasonable.  The only reason it might fall off is that it only had two chapters, and may perhaps settle in on the single-campus page, not rising to the 'national' attention level. What an ugly incident for both Illinois and Wisconsin.
 * The page itself should include a data point on when these chapters closed, and probably a table for those two chapters. If memory serves, the mid-1920s represented the high point of Klan activity, even so far as to taking over a national political convention.  I think it was called the Klanbake.
 * On the broader point, I'd support placing the honor societies into a custom table. Jax MN (talk) 21:29, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank the article notes on the WP landing page for the find. I think the article has the wrong name and is missing a key component. The two yearbook pages included in the article do not call this KKK Honor Society, but Ku Klux Klan. I checked the first source. It says: "The UW chapter of the honorary fraternity called the Ku Klux Klan was formed in 1919 under its parent fraternity Phi Gamma Delta." Given that the article cannot be called Ku Klux Klan, it could be Ku Klux Klan (collegiate) or Ku Klux Klan (honor fraternity). There is also the later name that the group went by to avoid confusion with the actual Klan. Although, more work is needed to prove it was an honor fraternity at both campuses. I also see that all members appear to belong to other fraternities, per the yearbook page. Was this an honor society for fraternity members? Should I start an article name discussion on the article's talkpage so that its creator can be involved? Rublamb (talk) 01:29, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I made some additions and edits after scanning the sources. The two chapters actually were connected, with members of "Alpha" founding "Beta". It was a junior interfraternity honor society. No idea what its membership criteria was. There much evidence that is was not Klan affiliated and that any related activities were in jest. For example, their robes were black, as was their color. Still need to address the article name. Rublamb (talk) 05:28, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Alpha Zeta chapter of Delta Sigma Phi at Alfred University started as the Ku Klux Klan in 1901. It withdrew to form Alpha Zeta in 1920. (Baird’s 1927, p. 86) The Almanac incorrectly lists this as Kappa Kappa Kappa. Similarly, the Almanac lists a former local at Illinois as Kappa Kappa Kappa. If related, the Alfred chapter would be the oldest so far. I have found numerous newspaper articles about the group at Illinois. Almost all campus fraternities nominated a represetative to KKK each year. One fraternity withdrew because their membership in it had little benefit. KKK was known for its annual dance. Later, as stated in a newspaper article, it was essentially a bridge club, organizing tournaments for the campus GLOs. Rublamb (talk) 13:23, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @Jax MN, do you want to see what Fran has on this? Rublamb (talk) 13:24, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Reading your note here, I was just thinking I should ask Fran and Carroll about this. Carroll is too careful of a yearbook researcher to have incorrectly listed these local names, especially under such a cloud of notoriety.  I assume, therefore, there was a use of euphemism here. But it also seems that the purpose of these local or national groups was divorced from the national racist-political organization of the KKK.  The campus groups may have held some level of respect for the KKK (remember, this is in the 1920s and perhaps up to the 1930s, before today's broad and intense revulsion over any hint racism appeared.)  But I read that their primary focus was academic honors.  The name choice may have been an attempt (weirdly) to gain publicity by ~branding linkage even without direct linkage. I'll ask C and F.  Jax MN (talk) 16:35, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Carroll told me just now that "The local at Alfred U that became Delta Sig changed to K. K. K. sometime in the teens (perhaps to make itself more attractive to a national?)" Thus Kappa Kappa Kappa, and not Ku Klux Klan. Makes sense...  They may come forward with more information from the files, relating to additional campuses.  Even though they don't track honor societies. Jax MN (talk) 17:11, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I have been in contact with an archivist at Alfred who did a program on the group. She had no knowledge of a connection to the national. Since Alfred's group formed in 1901 and Wisconsin yearbooks says the fraternity started in 1906 at Indiana, I think we can assume the Alfred chapter was its own thing. I am going to start at a name change discussion on the article's talk page. It probably should be called by its second name as it had 5 chapters as KKK and 13 chapters as Tu-Mas. Rublamb (talk) 19:17, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Finally working on the Honor Society tables and ran into a problem. Collegiate groups are divided into general, liberal arts, and sciences. The problem is that biology, geography, mathematics, chemistry, environmental science, and physics fall under the liberal arts but are, of course, under science. The outliers would be the technology and engineering groups. However, moving groups to the correct header is not going to help people find information if they are confused about the liberal arts vs. science. Since a table is sortable by field, I propose reorganizing the collegiate groups to general and specialized OR to have one big list for all collegiate, but to do away with the liberal arts/science sections and sub-sections. Thoughts? Rublamb (talk) 04:28, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I think I have a solution. There is a reasonsabe division into humanities, social sciences, and science/technology/engineerng. So there can be some division, instead of one huge list. And this avoids the issue of math and science being part of the traditional liberal arts (while some of social sciences and business are not). Rublamb (talk) 04:31, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Bones Gate
Another editor created Draft:Bones Gate, about a local fraternity at Dartmouth. I believe I have added enough sources to meet notability. I had to go a bit heavy on the misconduct to get non-local articles but it looks like these events were significant at the time. (I ignored the arrests for drugs and other charges for selling/serving alcohol to minors). Would someone take a look and move it to the mainspace? Thanks. Rublamb (talk) 15:03, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Used AFCH, so it marks the existing redirect for deletion.Naraht (talk) 19:24, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks. That is where I got stuck. Rublamb (talk) 20:51, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
 * AFCH marked the redirect, I think that is a new addition to the tool.Naraht (talk) 21:02, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
 * An Admin removed the old page, clearing the way. I just moved the draft to mainspace, and cleaned up the categories as best I could. I think this is done. Jax MN (talk) 16:17, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Chapter lists, old or new name of school?
Chapter list for Mu Mu Mu. Gamma chapter was founded at the school when it was Cow Normal College, school changed to Cow State College while it was active, the chapter went inactive and then the school became Cow State University. At this point, I think that most of what I've seen has been Cow State University, but for the founding chapter, it gets mentioned in the *text* that it was founded at Cow Normal College (now Cow State University). Right? Naraht (talk) 15:04, 12 January 2024 (UTC)


 * I thought the norm was to use either the name when chapter was founded or the name when the chapter closed (depending on what has a link in Wikipedia). I prefer the latter as is usually closer to the school's current name (Cow State College vs. Cow State University). I add efn when the name is significantly different, as in Cow Normal School for Exceptional Dairy Arts is now Wisconsin State University. On a practical note, once a chapter is closed, we no longer need to update that entry in a list. Trying to track the changing name of a college not only adds work but also means that we are not using the data provided by the original source (assuming it is Bairds or the Almanac). Rublamb (talk) 16:13, 12 January 2024 (UTC)


 * I think Rublamb has it correct here, that the name at chapter closure often aligns with the present name. Typically this reflects the shift from College --> University.  For clarity, where the name shift is a significant departure, I have been providing the former name in parentheses. I.e: the case of Trine University (formally Tri-State University). EFNs are also quite helpful, where the situation is unclear. Jax MN (talk) 19:02, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Omega - Memorial chapter and Sorting.
Specifically to Omega Phi Chi, though I'm sure there are other situations. If Omega is a memorial chapter (and thus has no date), what should happen on a date sort
 * Fake an invisible date in the sort so it stays between Psi and Alpha Alpha
 * Let it drop it to the bottom in sort (so that it acts like it is at Jan 1, 9999), which is what it does automatically.Naraht (talk) 23:52, 27 January 2024 (UTC)


 * I'd prefer that we use an invisible date, and render it in alphabetical order. These were generally adopted early in an organization's development, and indeed may have been created with establishment of national intentions. So this would be a courtesy listing, but alphabetization is a recognized standard. Better than have it show up at the end of the list. Jax MN (talk) 00:02, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Related issue: Often, the memorial chapter does not have a charter date. If the chapter list is in date order and it is a group that randomly assisgned names, where to do put the memorial chapter? At the bottom of the list? Or maybe leave it off? Rublamb (talk) 01:42, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Honor Society founders...
We have Category:College fraternity founders and Category:College sorority founders, but, I don't think Alan A. Brown belongs in either, so an Category:College Honor Society founders category would make sense, right? (Professionals go with their gendered socials, here...) Naraht (talk) 19:12, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I agree that that category ought to be created. No need for a male version and a female version, since honor societies have essentially been co-ed since inception.  Some holdouts, but separate categories are not warranted for them. Jax MN (talk) 22:23, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
 * @Naraht: were you going to create this? I just wrote an article for William E. Warner who founded Epsilon Pi Tau. I could not find a category to cover this relationship. Rublamb (talk) 02:09, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
 * created as Category:College honor society founders, uncapitalized.

Alpha Tau Sigma
In terms of Notability, Alpha Tau Sigma was on only one campus, and active for 52 years. (1912-1964). In general, should articles meeting this level of notability be created?Naraht (talk) 21:25, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
 * The Notability rules for Project article creation would indicate that this group rises to a level of notability. While not having three or more chapters, it existed for multiple decades, likely owned property, and articles are available to cite. I also tend to think that, if a successor national holds that group as a chapter, and notes its earlier incarnation as a local as part of the EFN notes on the chapter list, there is no need (at present) for a separate Wikipedia article for the local.  Phi Sig, for example, absorbed a 102-year old local at the University of the Pacific, called Rhizomia, creating its Phi Tetarton chapter. Apparently, the group was faltering, and a national connection didn't result in stability; it died out.  It was essentially two decades older than the entire national.  I don't see a need to create a separate article for it, unless it had withdrawn to revert to local status, as a continuing, active group.  Jax MN (talk) 22:29, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I do not think we should invest time creating articles for local group unless there is extensive coverage or fame (think Skull and Bones). Being in Baird's is not enough to prove notability for Wikipedia, and this article would need at least one other non-college/fraternity source to fight an AfD. However, Professional fraternities and sororities is the perfect place to include these local groups that are in  Baird's but not detailed elsewhere. Rublamb (talk) 15:50, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

Eta Upsilon Gamma
Does anyone have information on *how* they died. I see them in the 1930 Baird's but have completely disappeared by he 1949 Baird's. I think we have enough for an article. Naraht (talk) 15:42, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I believe you mean the dormant 2-yr school sorority. The Zeta Lambda chapter of Zeta Tau Alpha formed as a local under that name at Rider University, forming in 1928, with the shift to ZTA coming in 1967.  However, Rider itself had been a two-year or business school, thus its Eta Upsilon Gamma chapter may have been one of that national sorority's chapters, withdrawing to be a continuing, orphaned local.  The dates might not line up exactly, with the name switch from "Rider Business College" to "Rider College" coming in 1920, and the approval to confer 4-year degrees coming in 1922. That chapter's website history may go into this further. Jax MN (talk) 17:12, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Copying the 1930s Baird's info into Draft:Eta Upsilon Gamma. I've got a few more sources
 * https://dallasgenealogy.org/finding-genealogical-clues-in-service-pins-medals-and-keys/ (Image of pin, trying to get permission from poster)
 * https://books.google.com/books?id=mc8TAAAAIAAJ, a few years of the sorority magazine (including mention of a Junior Panhellenic Conference with HUG, BSO and SIX)
 * Various issues of the sorority handbook such as https://books.google.com/books?id=e2FHAQAAMAAJ with more information on the insignia.Naraht (talk) 23:14, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Created
Eta Upsilon Gamma has been created. I've found a few other things that I want to add, like a link to the National Junior Panhellenic,( had HUG, BSO and SIX at one point). Also, Alpha Beta is not the last chapter, Woodbury had Alpha Epsilon chapter which apparently also became part of ZTA in 1967-1968. I reached out to ZTA and the Archivist there is truly interesting in cleaning things up, not just for ZTA but across the NPC and other groups.Naraht (talk) 21:32, 12 April 2024 (UTC)


 * I have added more chapters and dates from the Almanac. I love that this connects to the Junior College of Bergen County that I created as part of the red-link project. Rublamb (talk) 20:07, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Grouped with Eta Upsilon Gamma in "Junior"
In general, I think groups that are grouped with Eta Upsilon Gamma are Beta Sigma Omicron (at least early), Sigma Iota Chi, Zeta Mu Epsilon(?) later. Others? Naraht (talk) 13:38, 16 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Maybe the info JAX is getting on the JPHC will reveal more. I am willing to work on articles for any that need them. I am fascinated by early women's history and the era of those those defunct women's schools that seemed to host these groups. Rublamb (talk) 16:27, 16 April 2024 (UTC)


 * , I had been corresponding with Fran at the archive, who kindly sent several documents from her personal archives relating to Junior Panhellenic, and also about several redlinked schools. Would you also like copies?  Jax MN (talk) 16:37, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes please.Naraht (talk) 19:20, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
 * OK - I emailed you the attachments and cover letters. Jax MN (talk) 20:08, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Texnikoi
I see that Texnikoi Engineering Honorary is in Category:Pages using infobox fraternity with non-matching name. I'm not sure why it wasn't showing up before 's short description edit. I think the article should simply be moved to Texnikoi which is currently a redirect to it, OK?Naraht (talk) 07:55, 13 May 2024 (UTC)


 * There were a lot of missing short descriptions and some naming issues found while working on Honor Society. Some don't have a frat infobox or lack the WP, so are can fall through the cracks--especially if they are not affiliated. This was one where the article name doesn't match the group's website. Please do move the article. Rublamb (talk) 08:17, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm just trying to figure out why adding the short description would be enough to add it to the list, I just think it hadn't changed for so long, that it was just carrying a cache version around, from before the generation of the infobox caused it to be in a maintenance group.Naraht (talk) 14:35, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * IDK either--it did't come up when I was moving honor societies under our umbrella a while back. A Wikipedia glitch I guess. I am cleaning the article and finding the needed sources. Rublamb (talk) 16:25, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Middletown Chapter, Alpha Delta Phi Society
Normally we don't have articles for individual chapters. Chapters founded in the 1850s may have a chance. Completely unreferenced, and I'm going to undo the changes in the ADPS article. Might be worthwhile keeping an eye on.Naraht (talk) 01:52, 21 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Too bad, because it is well-written. Should we leave its author a note on the talk page. Rublamb (talk) 01:35, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

free_label on Merging
For merger of equals into a *new* name, I *think* we have only two examples: Phi Kappa and Theta Kappa Phi into Phi Kappa Theta and Kappa Omicron Phi and Omicron Nu into Kappa Omicron Nu. I changed Kappa Omicron Phi's free_label to match Omicron Nu, but the Phi Kappa and Theta Kappa Phi are inconsistent with that. So our choices (before my change are) This may also affect whether the text afterwards looks like "February 29, 1999 into Mu Mu Mu" or "Mu Mu Mu (February 29, 1999" (Note, this is *not* for group A merging into group B, though we may want to look to make sure *that* is consistent.) Opinions? (and let me know if we have any other merger of equals into new name)Naraht (talk) 14:24, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
 * free_label=Merged
 * free_label=Merger
 * free_label=Merged, to create


 * I would love some guidance on this--whatever we decide should be officially added to the WP instructions just in case it comes up again. When creating the infoboxes for Kappa Omicron Phi and Omicron Nu yesterday, I really did not know what to use for the free_labels because there were several facts: which group it merged with, the date of the merger, and the name of the new group. Thinking about it now, the name of the successor group and the merger date are what really matters. That being the case, "merged to create" is more exact, even though it is longer. The date could follow the name as in Mu Mu Mu (February 29, 1999) OR it could be separated with a hard return. Should we also decide on the free_label for the new group, something like "Formed from" or "predecessor"? For "normal" mergers, I prefer Merged: February 29, 1999 (Mu Mu Mu) but have no idea why. Maybe because the ending date of the group seems more important. However, I am also okay using "Merged" as the free-label in all cases and not treating these differently. (By the way, if you do know of any other groups like these that lack articles, let me know.) Rublamb (talk) 15:17, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Only other merger of equals that springs to mind is Delta Sigma Rho-Tau Kappa Alpha, but with them keeping both names, it may be less needed. I'll keep the splits in mind.Naraht (talk) 15:44, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
 * @Naraht: Looks like Delta Theta Phi was a merger of three "equals". But it has more issues than the infobox. Rublamb (talk) 05:52, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
 * In case this train hasn't yet left the station, I support use of the free label "Merged", as it signifies past tense. No need for "to create", as it is implied by use of the separate free label for "Successor", which I also like. Nice work on this. Jax MN (talk) 07:59, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Successor is the term used in the Infobox Organization, so it provides consistency too. Rublamb (talk) 08:12, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Subject specific GLO templates
Given some of the longer "see also"s, should there be templates specific to GLOs on a particular subject. I'm thinking specifically one for legal and one for medical. I'm against including the Filipino GLOs in this, and I'm not sure on whether to includes the groups that are inactive. Opinions?Naraht (talk) 13:39, 29 January 2024 (UTC)


 * I am guessing you think there are too many to have to one template for all professional groups? Yes for medical, with a divison for active and inactive (many still in articles for creation). Maybe pharmacy could go in the same template? And, would you divide dentristry or leave it mixed? Looking at Professional fraternities and sororities, there are not that many legal (unless there are a bunch of articles for creation). What is the number that makes something template worthy? Because music has the same number as legal. Rublamb (talk) 15:25, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Arguably we have one for all of the Professionals. I'm thinking about having one *crossing* the Professional and Honoraries. (the See alsos have often included both). Dentistry is *very* definitely separate, though we have close to enough for that. And Music, we already have Template:NIMC. (Templates should always have five entries or more).Naraht (talk) 22:08, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I was thinking about a template organized by emphasis, rather umbrella group affiliation as that would be more like the long lists often found with See Also. Including the honor groups makes sense. (I just found that Phi Delta Kappa considered itself an honor society at one point). Rublamb (talk) 01:38, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Legal
OK, lets look at Legal First. We start with the 7 (when I started) in Category:Professional legal fraternities and sororities in the United States. I'm not sure if the three that merged into Delta Phi should be mentioned until they have articles. I'm also not sure there are any inactive ones outside the merge. To this we add the four groups mentioned in the "See also" of Phi Delta Phi Any others? The other question is a group has changed between type of organization (professional -> Honorary -> Legal Association) do we use how they started or how the ended/today.
 * Delta Theta Phi
 * Gamma Eta Gamma
 * Kappa Beta Pi -- Unclear if they are still active.
 * Nu Beta Epsilon
 * Phi Alpha Delta
 * Phi Delta Delta
 * Phi Delta Phi
 * Sigma Delta Kappa -- Added them to the category, though unclear if they are still open.
 * Phi Beta Gamma -- Added them to the category, apparently not still open.
 * Order of the Coif (honor society, law)
 * The Order of Barristers (honor society, law; litigation)
 * Alpha Phi Sigma (honor society, criminal justice)
 * Lambda Epsilon Chi (honor society, paralegal)

First Draft
Comments welcome.Naraht (talk) 00:42, 1 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Not ignoring your work, just lacking Internet access. There were more than I thought. Great job Rublamb (talk) 09:03, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Colloquial names
You may find this page useful. List of colloquial names for universities and colleges in the United States. An editor named started it, whom I used to see a lot around here. I hope he is OK. Jax MN (talk) 16:23, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Haven't seen him around in a while. Page is *completely* unreferenced. :(Naraht (talk) 15:01, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Apparently Choster remains active, but on other WP projects. Regarding the list of colloquial names, I added it to our watchlist as interesting to our Project. You are correct, of course, that that page is unreferenced, though the school pages themselves should always reference these abbreviations in the lede, and probably do. If not, it would appear to be an omission/error. I note too that List pages don't have the same stringency regarding citations, though maybe they should. Jax MN (talk) 19:13, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Frankly, I think I'd be more comfortable with that page moved from mainspace to a reference subpage of WikiProject Higher education. Naraht (talk) 19:57, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Should you wish to do so, I won't mind. While useful to us, occasionally, it is more germane to their project. Jax MN (talk) 20:45, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I would add this to a list of useful references, rather than addopting it. Do we have such a list? I also found the similar List of university and college name changes in the United States and List of university and college mergers in the United States. Rublamb (talk) 16:11, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't want to adopt it either. But a least the last two have some references.Naraht (talk) 19:47, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm still around. I don't remember creating this article but if I did, it was almost certainly over a decade ago, when both the standard for referencing and the use of disambiguation pages were rather different from today. It may still have some use for editors working in higher education topics, but it's probably obviated now that the dab infrastructure is much more built out.-- choster (talk) 19:31, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Number of names for separate member pages
If there are 50 chapters of Mu Mu Mu, we create the List of Mu Mu Mu chapters. How many *referenced* Mu Mu Mu members with wikipedia pages (even with a primary source like a list on the Mu Mu Mu national website) do we need before the chapter list gets split out? Is 50 a target here? More, less? (For example, I think right now, Alpha Chi Omega is at 43. Also if they are split out, is just splitting out what is there now, OK even if it doesn't fit the nice neat tables of something like List of Alpha Phi Alpha members?Naraht (talk) 04:47, 11 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Great question. I look at the total number of names but also the visual aspect when making the decision to move alumni lists to a new article. Because we divide alumni lists into sections by profession, the overall appearance appears longer even if the count is less than 50. In this case, I would go ahead and create the new article, with the assumption that there more names will eventually be added. With regards to format, I now try to create the new article with the same format as the orginal list, because that covers copyright issues. Then, I divide the list into sections by profession and make any needed additions or changes. Tables are not needed for lists and probably should not be used unless the chapter is known for essentially the entire list (making a table that provides name, chapter, notability, and references). In fact, WP:UNI hates tables for alumni lists, and I have given up that fight. A neutral editor in one such debate noted that an empty column is not needed and is distracting if the majority of the individuals lack chapter/class year content. Rublamb (talk) 16:39, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
 * So it sounds like 40 alumni would take up about the space as 50 chapters, and given copyright issues, that the procedure would be if it meets that level, then to do a cut and paste creation, and then split by profession if needed. As such, List of Alpha Chi Omega members should be created.Naraht (talk) 17:45, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, I agree with that. I will be happy to do this one. Rublamb (talk) 18:39, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I literally just picked that as an example since it was the first that I saw. I'll take a look at your process and post here if I have any questions. :)Naraht (talk) 19:13, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
 * @Naraht: For some reason, I tend to work on alumni lists for dormant groups more often than active groups. Maybe I like the data to be a "closed set" or the ease of finding obituaries as sources. Also, there are no issues with members adding themselves or other non-notables. That being said, there are many groups that have no notables listed, so this could become a new project--even if we just add those names found through a Wikipedia search. Of course, newer organizations are less likely to have notables with Wikipedia articles, but I find it hard to believe that a long-standing honor group has no notables. Rublamb (talk) 12:51, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
 * On several pages, the list of Phi Sigma Kappa notables, for example, I wrote a short guideline for the Talk page that sets the criteria for inclusion. Something similar might be cut-and-pasted to many of the others, adjusted for nuances.  Jax MN (talk) 16:32, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

University of Illinois
Statement and question... Naraht (talk) 15:42, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
 * 1) ) *Any* organization with a founding date at U of Illinois prior to the 1960s is refering to the main campus, neither the Chicago or Springfield campuses existed until the 1960s.
 * 2) ) For U of Illinois main campus, can we standardize on the city? I propose *just* Champaign, Illinois
 * I wouldn't mind standardizing on one or the other, for brevity's sake. However, I just called the Greek Affairs office there, and it was explained to me that the chapters are roughly split between the two cities. Jax MN (talk) 20:33, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Well, the question then is are we indicating the city/state of the institution of higher education, or the city/state of the fraternity house? In my opinion, the answer is the first, because otherwise we couldn't do the honoraries/nonhoused Professionals/nonhoused socials.Naraht (talk) 00:52, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
 * We may want to standardize on the city where the school's oldest campus is. For some years I'd thought that Champaign was the more important of the two, but even old maps show the importance of Urbana to the campus. This won't come up often, and appears to be an UIUC issue. Again, for brevity?  Maybe use Champaign. But I don't have a strong opinion either way. Anyone else want to weigh in? Jax MN (talk) 01:09, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
 * @Naraht: Because the campus and chapter house locations are the same for most organizations, I don't really think about which we are actually indicating in the location field. However, Illinois and Minnesota Twin Cities are always an issue, along with a few New York colleges that have several campuses under the same name. For historic/defunct chapters, I try to figure out which campus used the listed name at the time (but often give up and let @Jax MN figure it out). For active chapters, I look for a chapter website or page within the college website to see if there is a physical address. Even with honor societies, there is usually a campus address or contact. But not always, which is where it gets tricky. For example, with a multi-campus college and a professional/honor society with no specific address, which location do you use? Although the college or university is located in two or three cities, doesn't it have a specific address with just one city? Rublamb (talk) 12:32, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
 * @ I think we have two very different situations here.
 * ) One campus, with Fraternity/Sorority houses in the neighborhood around campus where the fraternity house might be over the line where the post office (or even incorporated city) change. For example, at University of Maryland, College Park (to pick a campus that isn't under discussion yet), it is within the realm of possibility for a fraternity house to be over the border from College Park, Maryland *to* University Park, Maryland. In that case, I'd still support using College Park, it doesn't make sense to change the entry if they get a house in Fraternity Row on campus.
 * ) Multi Campus college. If Beta Alpha Psi's Alpha Alpha chapter is chartered to Long Island University, then it should be investigated whether it is chartered to LIU-Brooklyn or LIU-Post, if to *both*, then both college and cities should be listed. If not known, don't list a city (and leave a note, either visible or not, that it should be investigated).Naraht (talk) 14:44, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I've developed a preference for selecting the location of Honor societies as the location of that particular college within a university. It made sense as these are managed by academic sponsors or departments.  For landed professional houses and social fraternities, seeking out the physical location will be more important.  Where that information is completely ambiguous or unknown I have been linking to the largest and oldest campuses. The beauty of being, I suppose one could say "Highly Directionally Correct" is that many lurking editors rise up to correct single errors and gaps, who wouldn't otherwise bother if there are lots of missing fields.  Heh. Jax MN (talk) 16:37, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Sounds like we both are saying that we prefer to look for the organization's location, not just that of the campus. Maybe the short answer to @Naraht's suggestion of standardizing complex campus locations is that that would be as a last resort. Rublamb (talk) 16:42, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
 * So Phi Beta Kappa would be wherever the campus address is, but the Geography Honor Society would be based off the location of the Geography department? That seems unnecessarily difficult.  It does get particularly interesting with Illinois, because the question becomes with lack of location, is that because it isn't known if the house is in Urbana or Champaign *or* if there is some question whether it might have been at Illinois-Chicago or Illinois-Springfield.Naraht (talk) 17:01, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I disagree. Think of it this way.  If a school has an agricultural campus and a main campus, I'd place the agricultural honors society on that Ag campus, while placing a general honor society at the pinnacle address in the hierarchy.  For a while, Yale had a separate Sheffield school.  That was the location of many honoraries during that time, but now that they have merged into Yale as a single institution, so I'd use the Yale address going forward.  It's not the best example, as both were in New Haven. The trigger for me is that I want these fields to answer the question, "on the campus, where would I find them, or someone who manages that society?" Jax MN (talk) 18:20, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
 * , I'm curious, where have you seen a main campus and an ag campus that far apart?
 * , three examples come to mind. The Minneapolis campus of the University of Minnesota is approximately seven miles away from the St. Paul campus, which was originally its Ag Campus.  Several other unrelated academic units are now situated there, because they had available space.  This includes Fashion Merchandising, and some design departments.  Hard sciences and liberal arts remain on the East Bank of the Minneapolis campus, which itself is split by the Mississippi River, with many newer buildings on the West Bank (Econ, soft sciences, dance, theater).  So that is one example.  I believe Cornell has a geographically distinct farm campus, too.  Rutgers has three campuses but it remains a single school. Jax MN (talk) 20:35, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

Chapters of Greek Societies by Campus
On the WP Watchlist, Chapters of Greek Societies by Campus includes many redirects to university aticles. I don't know if this happened because the original article was deleted or because the university article once included externsive content on fraternities and sororities. However, because of the recent activity of one WP:UNI editor, most of the GLO content has been removed from these universityarticles. As a result, most of the redirects go to useless content (such as, "The university has numerous fraternities and sororities.") In on article that I checked, the Greek Life section was completely removed.

Questions: Considering that these redirects and hundreds of others are included in the table of WP articles on our project page, do we want to remove these redirects from our watchlist? Is anyone actually monitoring the Greek Life content of thesef university articles? Should these redirects be deleted from Wikipedia? Rublamb (talk) 15:24, 20 February 2024 (UTC)


 * My suggestions:


 * 1) I'd like to see a separate article for each campus with a Greek system, with a short history and a comprehensive list of chapters, past and present.  Fully cited, noting impact, architectural significance (if any) and campus traditions. For some schools this will be extensive, and for others, the article will be modest.
 * 2) Where these articles are not yet written, we should set a placeholder list, like this:  UIUC Greeks or Michigan State Greeks.  To facilitate new editors joining the Project, a Talk Page primer may be offered, pointing to example pages as templates.  I wish, for example, that a Greek-friendly editor, someone who knows the main Illinois campus, or Purdue, would write a page for those campuses similar to the ones I did for Minnesota, MIT or Cornell.
 * 3) Where even a placeholder list is not available, we should include a list of the active chapters on the main college or university article, in some cases, reverting any recent deletions of these sections that  cited.  I hadn't known of that effort, and find it unsupportable.  These same articles may list an obscure, trendy environmental point about a campus building, or offer a paragraph about a campus radio station, yet that editor feels they ought to delete a single sentence noting the existence of GLOs which may serve 10% to 20% of the campus?  Ridiculous.
 * 4) To track the long effort to write and improve these pages we should keep the redirects.  The Watchlist may be improved by noting against each page name what its status might be, either broken anchor, redirect, bare list, or full treatment.
 * Good catch. Jax MN (talk) 16:45, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I am not in favor of creating 500 or more redirects that don't link to useful content and have no realistic timeframe for article creation. Although your goal is within the WP scope, we are a small group that is challenged to oversee the creation and updating of organization articles and chapter lists. Plus, we know from experience that these campus Greek Life articles have a difficult time fighting AfD challegnes and are very likely to become dated or inaccurate since they will not have an active champion to make the needed annual updates (if WP members create them, rather than someone from the college). Furthermore, we have not been successful keeping GLO content in college articles, where it makes the most sense to live for most campuses. In the recent past, there was not WP support for my suggestion to add the Greek Life sections of college articles to our watchlist; creating these redirects would be doing just that.
 * That being said, if these redirects are created, the current name format (as decided previously in a Talk Page discussion) would be: List of University of Cows fraternities and sororities OR University of Cows fraternies and soroities. All active article titles are now in that format, with some variations for student organizations or societies. I was just "corrected" by an admin for having redirects for "Auburn University Greek life" (the name of the draftspace article) to "List of fraternities and sororities at Auburn Univesity" and the actual article List of Auburn University fraternities and sororities, so I am pretty sure we are only going to be "allowed" to create one redirect. Rublamb (talk) 17:09, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Is there a way to create a work list
@Naraht and @Primefac, is there a way to have a section on the WP page that lists articles with no infobox, no short description, a stub notice, or articles with templates such as peacock, no sources, primary sources? I have seen such things on other WP pages, but don't know what is involved. But think this could be useful in directing our editing time. Rublamb (talk) 17:43, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Let me know what WP pages they are on and I'll try to clone.Naraht (talk) 23:18, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Take a look at WikiProject North Carolina/Requested articles. It looks like this is populating using automated tags. If this is not helpful, let me know and I can look for another example. Rublamb (talk) 15:49, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Let me see what I can do. Probably going to be a few days to figure out the copy and JL-Bot appears to only fill on Saturdays. I'll let you know when I have something.Naraht (talk) 14:38, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Greek letter umbrella organizations and European Fraternal Societies
The European Fraternity Societies have sort of an odd relationship with this WP, but I'm wondering whether League of Estonian Corporations belongs in Category:Greek letter umbrella organizations. Naraht (talk) 14:32, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I think so. Historically, the quite-similar German fraternal societies are comfortably within our scope, and while the Estonians use the name "Corporations" in a manner Americans are not accustomed to, still, they fit. These English language articles, of course, are secondary and will mirror those in the Estonian or other closer European languages. Jax MN (talk) 20:05, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Except for the fact that they seem to fence. Rublamb (talk) 20:06, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Well, yes, sure they do. The German fraternities do too, as part of their long-standing culture.  Yet the similarities run strongly parallel with US GLOs:  collegiate-based, self-selective, initiatory, some instances of "proving oneself" required, a fee to join, connections for networking during and after college, the trappings of regalia including crests, colors and secret rituals, mottos and a set of ideals or guiding principles, and often, buildings owned by a board of alumni or governors.  The item of "fencing" as part of their culture is akin to the the practice of "step shows" among Black and multicultural fraternities. It's just an additional thing they do: an affinity. Jax MN (talk) 20:21, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
 * OK, they belong in the category, then the question is whether the Category is correctly named: Should it be Category:Fraternal umbrella organziations? Category:Fraternal Collegiate umbrella organizations? (though I think we have a few articles on non-collegiate GLOs)Naraht (talk) 20:28, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
 * As we include non-collegiate groups as a result of their current or former use of Greek letter names, I'd opt to be inclusive here. But defer to your longer history working with categories and how to name this.  Jax MN (talk) 20:48, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Chapter lists vs. Member lists.
I know there is a tendency to hold off the creation of separate articles for chapter lists if the only source is primary, does that also apply to member lists? I'm thinking specifically for Alpha Chi Sigma. (Which could use some secondary sources anyway, probably Baird's to start). Naraht (talk) 03:53, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I would think so; there's not much point in having a list of notable members if they're only sourced to the org itself. Primefac (talk) 11:30, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I support your suggestions, here. We've got a workable framework that almost always insists that a person is profiled in a Wikipedia article of their own prior to listing them on a fraternity notables list.  With alternative citations they can also be noted.  Many of us police these articles with these rules in mind, otherwise deleting non-notables.  By the way, Baird's Manual, 20th ed. lists tens of thousands of fraternity and sorority alumni, broken out by field, in the Appendix, pages A-8 thru A-65. Mention here could provide additional citations for individual articles and notables lists. Jax MN (talk) 15:33, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
 * The difference I think is that additional Secondary references are probably to single individuals where he primary are often to a much larger list. So consider the following situation for Mu Mu Mu sorority. The Mu Mu Mu sorority pledge manual (downloadable and on archive.org) lists 67 individuals (with what they are famous for) who are Mu Mu Mu alumnae. 30 of those have Wikipedia pages (assume no issue of notability for those 30).
 * Should the chapter article list those 30 women or *only* out of those thirty the ones who have secondary references
 * If the following edition of the pledge manual has 50 women who have wikipedia pages, should the separate wikipedia page only contain the ones with secondary references?
 * I think this boils down to the following concept. If a fact is not controversial, it can be left in a wikipedia article for some time without reference (or only a primary one), but if that slice of the article is split out, it must reach higher standards.Naraht (talk) 19:07, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I yield to the expertise of others here. My understanding of Wikipedia rules is that a good secondary source that lists several facts may be used to verify notability, while additional 'color' may be derived from more lengthy treatments from citable and verifiable primary sources (is that the correct term?) that is, solid sources, but somehow connected to the person. Our array of sources cannot only be major newspapers of record or scholarly journals. --An example of "good, but not blue-chip references" are national websites or pledge manuals. In the same way, I'd dismiss most factoids from personal websites, Instagram posts or similar, BUT would accept an exact founding date if I discovered it on an Instagram page, improving on another reference that simply lists the year. Naraht, to your point about leaving an uncontroversial fact without reference, awaiting a further mention in a citation, I share your opinion.  Jax MN (talk) 20:29, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
 * My short answer is: There is a difference between the two.
 * A chapter list is a grouping of non-notable organizations, meaning that notability has to be proved for the article. Since a self-published source cannot be used to establish notability, we need other sources for a chapter list article to survive an AfD. (Same with a list of fraternities and sororities at specific colleges). A list of notable alumni pulls together notable people who already have Wikipedia articles and, therefore, does not need a source to prove that its components or topic are notable. See WP:LISTPEOPLE and WP:EXEMPT1E which essentially say notability is given if a person has a Wikipedia article, but you need a source to prove a connection to the fraternity. Best case, the bio article indicates the relationship to the GLO and has a source that you can use.
 * When I am editing a long GLO member list with no sources, I will often add sources only to red-linked names or if the associated bio article lacks a source. But that is just for speed and does not technically comply with WP:LISTPEOPLE. Yet this seems to suffice for the bulk of the university alumni lists. The sources I use to prove that someone belonged to a GLO: obituaries, Baird's, college magazine articles, organizational directories, features in organizational magazines, Political Graveyard, Greek Letter Men of New York, city bluebooks that list memberships (Washington D.C.'s good), newspapers, old biographical dictionaries, and Who's Who type books. Also, you would be surprised how many wedding announcements mention GLO memberships. I might use a fraternity or sorority's website to find notable names but then look for another source for proof of membership. I think these website lists fall under promotional content and should not be considered a reliable source (harsh, I know). I would prefer that we use GLO directories and magazines as a last resort or as a supplemental source because the other sources are a better fit for the secondary source rule. That being said,  you can use GLO publications and websites as a source in a member's bio article (unless the person's only claim to fame is a connection to the GLO) because it is a secondary source in that instance. Following my advice above, you would add the GLO publication to the bio article and would not need to add a source to the list article.
 * You may notice that I often move unproven or red-linked names that lack sources to the Talkpage pending sources. However, I might leave a name if the person's bio article mentions their membership. This is only if the organization's membership is open and not for something like Skull and Bones. That being said, I am fine with old membership directories, histories, or pledge manuals being used, assuming all are from the national. In reality, we don't seem to get AfD of member lists. Mostly because many people do not know that each element of a list is supposed to have a source. Rublamb (talk) 17:09, 3 April 2024 (UTC)


 * My perspective is that WP:SPINOUT provides helpful guidance on when and why to split an article. --Enos733 (talk) 17:24, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @Enos733: Yes. And we also need to be aware of WP:CROSSCAT. Unfortunately, not every GLO meets the requirement for related list articles, despite our goal of consistency of article organization. Rublamb (talk) 00:03, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Reset
OK, so what it boils down to is "Alpha Nu chapter of Alpha Chi Sigma at Colgate University" is non-notable on its own. Linus Pauling, alumnus of Alpha Chi Sigma *is* notable on their own.Naraht (talk) 15:12, 4 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Yes, that is the short of it. Rublamb (talk) 15:39, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
 * For now, I concur. Jax MN (talk) 16:45, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
 * At this writing, our Project group has much to do in completing the many missing pages for all fraternities that emerged with at least three chapters and with a tenure of at least ten years. --Raimond Baird had settled on this bar of entry.  Roughly speaking, these fraternities are all on our Watchlist where the missing pages are redlinked. We are engaged in the creation of table lists of chapters and lists of notables that are connected to fraternity articles; many will be spun off as sub-pages.  Each fraternity article should have a solid infobox, including notes about successor organizations, with color swatches, crests and a thumbnail of its pin or key; about 50% do. We also support writing articles about the remaining schools, many now closed, which hosted chapters but which do not yet have an article.  I'd project that all this will take at least five more years with our present level of volunteerism.  This is our present trajectory, along with policing vandalism and cleaning up articles for encyclopedic writing style and clarity.
 * Of course we have outliers: Most or all of the articles about the Divine nine are twice as long as they ought to be, as are a few of the traditional GLOs. Both sets are subject to good-faith bloat and puffery. While we aren't rushing to create them, there are several dozen articles about notable local chapters, or articles about chapters of national fraternities that have some claim to notability.  Long ago I wrote a draft of notability rules for such pages, which offered up a few additional rules that build on Baird's structure.  Hence, to be noteworthy a local must own property, have a long-established presence on a campus, have some external media mentions of significance, etc.
 * If I were to forecast, Wikipedia will continue to expand and the Inclusionists will win over or survive beyond the demise of the Deletionists. Why? Because the natural instinct to "add just one more thing" to articles one cares about, is, in the end, stronger than the instinct to delete someone else's work. Perhaps an AI beast may be engaged in finding more hidden citations and in finalizing the work of rendering articles from our watchlist. I think that eventually, all chapters, active or not, may be viewed as notable, enough for a start page. Why?  Because Wikipedia is a honey trap for Aspies and those blessed souls who are driven to be comprehensive and accurate, even where this transcends the goal of being "encyclopedic in style".  Eventually, long after the present group of Project editors log out for the final time, our work will become a slice of the World Mind.  Why? I surmise that something will have to serve up the database for such an entity, and Wikipedia might as well be part of it. You asked...  Jax MN (talk) 16:45, 4 April 2024 (UTC)