This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
List of social fraternities and sororities article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
![]() | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
What ought we do about this organization? Beta Sigma Phi is clearly notable, and has over a million initiates. However, they are not a collegiate society but rather a social group of ladies who've formed an adult-phase society which happened to pick a Greek name. It's rather traditional, certainly. But not in the sense that we mean here, where "Traditional" is defined as the collegiate-based academic/social fraternities and sororities that are most often part of the NIC or NPC.
It's a fluke, really, that this organization is Greek named. They could just as well be called the Debutante Club, or the Magnolia Society. And thus, perhaps not correct for this page. Though I wish them well. Jax MN ( talk) 13:42, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
I *think* the co-ed is mostly in Greek Letter Order, while the others are in latin alphabet spelling of the greek letter order, they should be consistent. Naraht ( talk) 17:05, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
I find this section odd. Although I do not think it is needed here, I could at least understand if this was the motto. But the text from the crest is not only a-typical in our WP Fraternity & Sororities tables, but is also too long for this format, making the table clutter. I want to delete this info, but also wanted to give others a chance to discuss since someone put a lot of work into this. Rublamb ( talk) 09:53, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
I'd done a quick review of this page to note GLOs that didn't have a coordinating "List of Chapters" page, or at least a standardized table of chapters on their main articles. You can find that surprisingly long list on the Talk page for the F&S Project, a place where we corral similar "to do" items that improve GLO articles generally. Regularly updated lists of chapters are a very helpful aspect of GLO pages.
This page, listing all the social fraternities and sororities, had been stable for some time. In the course of my reviewing for these missing List pages I provided links to the missing chapter lists that had been created, following the established style. The metatext looked like this: [[Acacia (fraternity)|Acacia]] ''[[List_of_Acacia_chapters|(Chapters)]]'', which results in both a link to the main article AND to a one-click link to either a List page, or a list on the main GLO article.
Naraht mentioned (on the Project Talk page) that, where a List page hadn't yet been created, we should create a REDIRECT to a list, where existing, on the affected GLO articles themselves, which I fully support. He offered to do this. But for the purposes of my reviewing all the GLO pages for missing List pages I was moving fast, and continued my churn through the list, and bare cleanup, following the established style. Good, so far.
Since then, an editor deleted the direct links for the Chapter Lists without, I think, recognizing the value they provide or opening a discussion on the matter. This page is a meta list, and I observe it is used by many as a launch page for getting to all the GLO articles. I personally find that when I am researching, this page is highly valuable for reminding me of GLO names, and often use the shortcut links to the chapter lists. The GLO articles themselves do not yet have a consistent stylesheet, where one can always find the chapter list or link to it in the same spot in the TOC, but on THIS meta list, it was easy to get to. I much prefer that these chapter list links be restored. Does any reader have a compelling reason not to include the "Chapter list" links, which is not addressed here? I want to understand.
I support the removal of indentations for the local chapters, replacing that syntax/style with a column, showing affiliation.
I support the adjustment of many of the line-item notes into EFNs.
I support the insertion of inactive groups into the main three lists of fraternities, sororities and co-ed groups, adding a column for status.
I support the removal of a couple of non-social groups. Note that some groups have a hard time defining themselves, calling themselves "Social/service honor societies", or some such, and this will require regular cleanup.
I note Rublamb's request for a discussion on including Greek text found on crests as a field. --I will let this play out; I can surmise that someone researching the nature of an inherited pin, or photo of a crest would find this column useful. As an Inclusionist around here, I'd keep it on that basis, even though, yes, it widens the table. Jax MN ( talk) 19:34, 28 December 2022 (UTC)