Jump to content

Talk:Alpha Epsilon Pi/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Notable Alumni

[edit]

Notable Alumni has been put in the correct format as seen here [[1]] in the notable members list. Changes that still need to be made: Put in Chapter (instead of displaying university) with link to university as shown in example. also, references need to be added. what's with the year date is that their graduation date? and eventually the chapter list needs to be converted as well. misterdan (talk) 16:44, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All entries need to be reliably sourced, especially those of living people. Any that are still unsourced in a week or so will be removed by me. --John (talk) 22:17, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I cited the official AEPi website for most of them. In the future we should try to get truly independent sources for these. --Mblumber (talk) 02:20, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I attended parties at an AEPi house while in college and my friends in the house used to say that Jimmy Brown, the great Syracuse running back, was a brother. If this isn't true it is quite a surprise, as I heard it from several sources. If it is true, why isn't he listed? 65.79.173.135 (talk) 18:59, 9 November 2010 (UTC)Will in New Haven65.79.173.135 (talk) 18:59, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are probably thinking of Ernie Davis who was a member of Sigma Alpha Mu.Charwinger21 (talk) 10:14, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Asterisks

[edit]

Can someone please explain the significance of the asterisks? They seem to mean nothing here. Beginning 20:56, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)

(I guess it took a year for your answer!) My assumption would be that they are inactive or "dead" chapters. To confirm that, I did searches on the web sites of three of those schools (VCU, Richmond, ODU) that I didn't think had chapters. Sure enough, none of them listed an AEPi chapter. --BDD 13:19, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The asterisks are indeed inactive chapters. That can be confirmed by going to www.aepi.org and you will see the same asterisks next to the same schools with a note saying that those are inactive chapters.

Amazing Irony

[edit]

It's just funny how a Jewish frat uses Latin acronyms. Rome WAS responcible for the destruction of the Second Temple, killing more than 2 mil Jews during the three large uprisings, and staring the diaspora. Not that I hold a grudge ;)

...just irnonic though.

(Well, I don't think AEPi would quite fit in with other frats if we named ourselves saomething like "Aleph Ein Peh."

-Sneaker.

...you do know it's Greek, not Latin, right? Adam Schloss 04:13, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

...you know its responisble, not responsible, right?

Ah, and the Greeks were so much better for the Jews. -Joshuapaquin 07:45, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We shoulda been אהפ (Hay is the equivilent of Epsilon fyi), and so what if we wouldn't fit in? We're Jews! We don't fit in anyway, plus we'd join the elite group of frats without greek names like farmhouse (but we'd be cool cause Farmhouse is a kinda silly name for a frat). SF2K1

First – this discussion has no bearing, as you can’t change the name of the fraternity on the Wikipedia page, just because you think it’s ‘ironic’ based on your extremely limited understanding of Jewish History. Second – Actually, your argument has no basis, because in the Gemara, Rashi on Yeshayahu 19:18 writes that the Greek alphabet is the only other alphabet than Hebrew that a kosher Sefer Torah can be written in. So according to Rabbinic Law, Greek is the 2nd most appropriate language of the Jews (Grouping all Hebrew script languages together: Hebrew, Aramaic, Yiddish). - SH —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.16.104.184 (talk) 14:02, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Copyviolation? Experienced editors please comment

[edit]

It looks to me like just about the entire article has been lifted from the history page at the AEPi website. Course of action? -Joshuapaquin 04:38, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]


who cares - it's not negative and AEPi hasn't said much, so it's ok under copyright law.

-sneaker.

Actually, it's a big deal even if AEPi doesn't complain. Content in Wikipedia is placed under a special license, so that it can be used again by others. So if we put something copyrighted here, it's like we're trying to change the author's rights without their permission. So copyrighted stuff without explicit permission is not OK. -Joshuapaquin 19:05, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what you're talking about. I wrote the bulk of the history section, and I summarized the information from the website and from other sources. That is historical fact, and since I rewrote that, there is no copyright violation. As for the mission statement, that does appear to be lifted directly from AEPi. However, that section is not a subjective desription - it is reporting on the actual publicly available mission statement. This is akin to quoting from a speech made by a public figure. SSherris 22:28, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're taking about the current history section, right? If so, this is a misunderstanding. For a while, the History section you wrote had been replaced by a straight copy-paste job from the AEPi website of a rather long text, see here for the diff where I reverted it back. I think the history section in the article right now is just super. -Joshuapaquin 02:04, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Userbox

[edit]

For anyone who happens to be a brother of AEPi, I've made a Userbox you can put on your user page.

Just put {{User:UBX/aepi}} on your userpage, and

ΑΕΠThis user is a brother of the Alpha Epsilon Pi Fraternity.

will show up and automatically put you in the "Wikipedians in Alpha Epsilon Pi" Category -- pm_shef 00:06, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Only current international Jewish Fraternity?

[edit]

I know for a fact that Sigma Alpha Mu has an active chapter at McGill in Montreal, Canada as well as numerous ones in the US. The Mcgill chapter just got activated this year, but im not sure that AEPi's claim is true anymore.

Sammy is not a Jewish fraternity anymore. It hasn't been since the vietnam Era when AEPi was the only fraternity to insist on only allowing Jewish members, which is why it has a 99% Jewish percentage of it's fraternal population. SF2K1

  • Yup, Sammy itself admits that it's a 'historically' Jewish fraternity, same with some locals of Pi Lambda Phi, AEPi is the only national that's officially Jewish. -- pm_shef 21:27, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is AEPi REALLY Jewish, or is it required by nondiscrimination, etc. laws to admit anyone regardless of faith, race, ethnicity, etc.? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]]).

  • Under most public instituions' governance processes, no student organization is allowed to discriminate membership. The notable exception is gender (and only gender) for historically single-gender fraternal social organizations. So how does AEpi get around this?
  • AEPi does not discriminate against other religions, and indeed there are a number of gentile (non-Jewish) AEPi brothers. However, the credo is Jewish, as is the symbolism behind the fraternity. LeoDaVinci (talk • contribs)

fraternal organizations are also exempted from some non-discrimination law, be they the free-masons or college fraternities.


Fraternities are legally allowed to admit or deny admission to anyone they want so it isn't a matter of law. The policy of AEPi is that it does not discriminate solely on the basis of religion, however if a non-Jew desires admission they must be seeking it in order to comply with AEPi's mision statement of creating Jewish leaders, so this is rarely the case. There are chapters where this policy is less strictly adhered to, but AEPi is in fact the ONLY "real Jewish fraternity"

I'm going to have to disagree with EVERYTHING you said there. There are no "Black Only" fraternities; just historically black ones. Such as Sigma Alpha Mu is a historically Jewish fraternity (Like AEPi). Jmlk17 06:04, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hah...I'll go ahead and take my foot out of my mouth :). Thanks for the clarification. Jmlk17 23:26, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Its been a while since I've been to a AEPi conference on rush, but in '05 we were told that if a gentile asks for a bid, we better have a reason besides religion for why we're not giving him one. We can try and fight this bid by telling the potential pledge that this is a Jewish fraternity, and put an emphasis on the Jewish part, but it still relies on the potential pledge changing his mind. Again, this is from memory. I don't know anywhere that this can be cited from, so don't take it as the official ruling. Jklharris 23:25, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fraternities DO NOT have to give out a bid to everyone. they can pick their members as they like and therefore simply wont give out a bid to someone who is not jewish. this is especially true as someone who is not jewish will not be able to fulfill their mission of creating jewish leaders in the community.99.255.58.85 (talk) 09:56, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"UNOFFICIAL" BLOGS

[edit]

OK - What's up with the "unofficial" blogs? 2 is OK, but we're going to end up with 2,000 blogs from AEPis and AEPi alums if there isn't some better standard. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SSherris (talk • contribs).

Chapter List

[edit]

While defunct chapters have been noted with an asterik, some listed chapters, notably the "colonies" are not officially recognized. IMHO it is irresponsible to list those which either AEPi national, or local instituions do not officially recognize. —The preceding unsigned comment was added 19:31, 12 March 2007 (UTC).

Examples

[edit]

Proposed Solutions

[edit]
  1. remove the colony section.
    • harsh, possibly unproductive
  2. remove all unrecongized groups from the colony section.
  3. create subsections noting nationally & institutionally recognized, either or and none of the above.
    • confusing and would not conform with Wiki-standards
  4. identify those colonies which are officially recognized by National and those recognized by the institition (similar to the asterik phenomena)


I live on the Guelph campus and I am an AEPi brother. The school has not recognized either AEPi or DU as affiliated with the school but we both a presense on the campus and organize events together at times. Although both frats are new we are growing larger each year. AEPi does have contact with many other chapters with Canada and the USA and we go on road trips to other chapters who recognize us and allow us to stay there. Removing us from this list is wrong so keep the colony on the page until our request for chapter status has cleared. - AEPi brother @ Guelph

Owning to our particular and special mission statement, AEPi will frequently recognize chapters that are not recognized locally by the schools they exist at. Guelph (as shown above) is a perfect example. Another key example was Georgetown where we were the first greek organization at the school where none were recognized. They are REAL AEPi chapters and deserve recognition in the chapter list. The best list to go by at any given time would be the chapter roll on the official aepi website www.aepi.org -AEPi Educational Leadership Consultant (International organization employee)

If you choose not to just link the list back to the AEPi website (which is usually pretty current with active chapters and colonies), then just leave the list as it stands. Defunct chapters should still be recognized because they did have alumni... and they still contributed to the nature of the fraternity as it is now. Similarly, as mentioned above, some schools choose not to recognize fraternities officially, despite them being viable, good organizations. To ignore "unrecognized" chapters (or even colonies) or failed attempts at colonization (eg, Dartmouth) is unfair to all our brothers. Keep them. 71.234.109.192 22:10, 5 October 2007 (UTC)rhetoric[reply]

Philanthropy

[edit]

It should be noted that not all chapters send their philantrophic donations to the Holocaust museum... My chapter, for example, contributes to Magen David Adom, the ambulance corps in Israel... 71.234.109.192 22:07, 5 October 2007 (UTC)rhetoric[reply]

This is not true. My chapter sends it to the American Cancer Society —Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.130.176.100 (talk) 21:58, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:AEPi Crest.jpg

[edit]

Image:AEPi Crest.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 22:53, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blazon

[edit]

I'm fairly sure the AEPi coat of arms cannot be blazoned as it is emblazoned (depicted) here. I've never seen a coat-of-arms like this. Can anyone provide a blazon? If you can, it would be a valuable addition to the article. — gogobera (talk) 03:22, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • I had added a proper blazon, but it was removed because it was unofficial, drawn from the actual shield rather than the other way around (as coats of arms are supposed to be). -Chabuk [ T • C ] 01:33, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Removal of pictures

[edit]

Over the last few months, several IP users have been removing the two fraternity house pictures on here. I keep reverting this change. Is there anyone out there who wants to own up to deleting them, and wants to explain the change? If so, please post below. Thanks. --Mblumber (talk) 03:56, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Moravian College sorority?

[edit]

It appears that a recent edit about Alpha Epsilon Pi being the name of a defunct local sorority at Moravian college is factually accurate. I don't like the current treatment however; in a perfect world we could handle it as a disambiguation, but there's never going to be a page for the other organization. Thoughts? --Mblumber (talk) 13:17, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Short lived sorority that isn't notable enough to have it's own article vs. one of the largest fraternities in the world which has been around since 1913 even though it only has a small group of potential members. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.255.58.85 (talk) 02:38, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Gerban

[edit]

This person is not listed on the AEPi international notable alumni list or on the Delta Rho chapter alumni list. Since there's no evidence that he is a member, I'll delete him. --Mblumber (talk) 16:52, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Probably because that's the wrong Mark Gerban. the Mark Gerban they are talking about is likely this one http://www.linkedin.com/in/markgerban who was a member from 1998-2001 and went to Drexel University (Delta Rho). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.255.58.85 (talk) 02:22, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
oh, wait, I think that IS the same Mark Gerban...
It is stated that "Alpha Epsilon Pi is a Jewish fraternity, though non-discriminatory and open to all who are willing to espouse its purpose and values.[4]" It looks as though Mark Gerban is being discriminated against because he represented Palestine, since other notable alumni (such as Mark Zuckerberg) did not graduate from Harvard, and hence were also not notable alumni. If Mark Zuckerberg met the criteria of being an alumnus of AEPi, so should Mark Gerban (regardless of political and social stance, since Wikipedia is supposed to be a neutral medium). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.182.82.214 (talk) 15:33, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It appears that editors are trying to add this person back to the list. Per WP guidelines, we cannot add anyone to the notable alumni list until membership in the fraternity is confirmed by a wp:reliable source. Everyone interested in this topic should review that page before adding this person again. This is especially important in light of the new WP biographical notability guidelines--Mblumber (talk) 20:52, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'd call the person's linkedin page a pretty reliable source — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.236.97.151 (talk) 13:59, 20 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You might think that, but you would be incorrect. There are actual reliable source guidelines in place on Wikipedia, and someone's Linked-in page is not considered reliable. --Mblumber (talk) 01:31, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New AEPi website

[edit]

There's a new webpage posted at www.aepi.org. Much of the pages are still under construction. Once all the content is uploaded, someone should fix the remainder of the dead links in this article. --Mblumber (talk) 03:04, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Controversies section

[edit]

The AEPi article, like other Wikipedia articles about national fraternities and sororities is a summary article. It is an overview, not meant to be a compendium of every historical item from every chapter. Thus, if it were up to me, I'd remove most of the "he said/she said" complaints from all of these articles.

These "Controversies" sections seem, to me, to be misnamed. There is nothing controversial about a hazing death: no alumnus, no national officer, and no member would have ever wanted such a thing to occur. Neither would they condone a rape, an assault, nor any other type of abuse - these are crimes of stupidity, immature passion or a combination of the two, but are not systemic, nor based on our society rituals or sober choice. So where I see them, I rename these sections as "Local chapter or member misconduct." I would also suggest that where allegations are made, but unproven with charges dropped, that these instances DO NOT rise to the level of notability where they deserve a reference link to even an individual chapter citation on the fraternity's list of chapters. Certainly, these ought not be promoted to full paragraphs in the article about a national fraternity itself, except where an event met a standardized bar of national notoriety. Thus, I'd place links to a substantiated rape or significant hazing event against the chapter notation itself, on the chapter list, especially if a chapter met its demise or was suspended because of the tragic and/or stupid event, or where someone was adjudicated with a felony.

Where a persistent national news story was sparked by an event (like the fraudulent story about A Rape on Campus at the Univ. of Virginia's Phi Kappa Psi chapter (again, a bogus story), I think this DOES rise to the bar where it should be noted in the main page article. In this extreme case the story merited a standalone article.

With all this in mind, as an editor that works on many fraternity articles, I recast the former "controversies" section of this article into two parts. The first is criticism of the national fraternity over occasional zealous use of the "member review" process to shift a chapter's culture to a more Jewish frame. Whether a reasonable management decision or not, and whether it even happened or not, the issue is national in nature and has been broadly reported. I then pushed the incidents of hazing or sexual misconduct into a lower subsection, clarifying by sub-header that they were local in nature.

Another editor may want to review these individual chapter-based events to see if the charges were sustained, or dropped, and whether so newsworthy as to merit a reference in these summary articles years after the fact. I do not blame a current chapter for the sins, real or not, of members from decades prior. Jax MN (talk) 15:55, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Alpha_Epsilon_Pi/Archive_1&oldid=1174182982"