Talk:Fraternity/Archive 1

Archive 1

Creation of the page from prior page

Please see Talk:Fraternity (disambiguation) for arguments/discussion leading the creation of this page.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 05:19, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Also, someone needs to clean up What Links Here. I can't work on that in the next couple days.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 05:19, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, whatever. I don't know what you did that was different than what I did, but it's done. (By the way, if you wanted it done a certain way, you should have done it.) But at least that's over.129.133.124.199 (talk) 23:10, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

I do not understand why a page Fraternal Organizations was suppressed to point to Fraternities, then the page it points to discusses things which are not fraternities like trade guilds. Fraternities are a subset of Fraternal Organizations. It is like squares and rectangles. All squares are rectangles not all rectangles are squares. The Fraternal Organization page should be restored and briefly discuss various TYPES of such organizations, then have links to articles on each type of organization to go into greater depth, as this article does do. Fraternal organizations include Fraternities and Sororities (both university ones and non-university ones); organizations like the Freemasons, or my own Kingpire of Dinaris, or the Knights of Columbus; Veterans Organizations like the American Legion and the VFW; religious organizations based on church membership but not including churches or their governing bodies; various knighthoods, both real and those who take the name like the Knights of Columbus and Knights of Pythias; some professional organizations organized like fraternities and which may call themselves fraternities like Phi Kappa and Kappa Kappa Kappa; and various other organizations of similar composition and purpose of brotherhood, mutual support, and promoting relationships like family, which leaves out trade unions, guilds, and nature organizations like the Audubon Society. MichaelSchwing 04:12, 3 July 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by MichaelSchwing (talk • contribs)

Add and concentrate on male only

I have enlarged the article by bringing in mention of many of the articles from the dab page (which must only contain links to articles which could be confused with "Fraternity"), plus adding mention of the religious fratertities (monks etc ... not normally called frats but that's what they are - male only organisations), and I have concetrated, by pruning, the article on "male only" which is afterall the meaning of the word. See also the dab page where I have removed all those items not needing disambiguation (mos:dab). Abtract (talk) 23:41, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I can't argue with your edit to the dab page, but I don't like what you've done to this article. You've essentially duplicated the look and feel of a dab page at the bottom of this article, even though we already have a separate disambiguation page. A certain anon editor and I went to considerable trouble to separate this article from the list of dab links.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 23:57, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I see you point but, with respect, you are confusing dab items and article content. The entries I moved from the dab page to here are not article which could easily be confused with fraternity in that a reader is highly unlikely to type in "Fraternity" when looking for an article on "Freemasons" ... so they do not belong on the dab page. They are however well placed in an article about fraternities because they are a type of frat. Now I do agree the lower half where I moved stuff in is rather sparse to say the least but I just wanted it in here and then it can be expanded to form a decent article in time ... I didn't want to lose it. Does this explai it to your satisfaction? Abtract (talk) 00:08, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

I see all my work has been reverted with more or less the only reason being that fraternities are not all male organisations .. really? Abtract (talk) 16:22, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, you apparently have a problem accepting that, but there is a list of mixed male and female and female only fraternities. They are referenced in the article. They are self-identified as fraternities. There are organizations that for a century and a half have been all male fraternities, and which are now male and female organizations, (Psi Upsilon). All I can think of that supports your position is a narrow literalism.P22575R15 (talk) 23:12, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Whatever they call themselves they are not fraternities (imho) if the include women ... otherwise what distinguishes a fraternity from any other club or professional or social (etc)organisation? Abtract (talk) 23:15, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, that's really the point, this isn't about your opinion, is it? "What distinguishes a fraternity from any other club"? The obligation to support the society, usually for life, a formal initiation, secrecy, or at least a heightened sense of privacy. Ultimately, an attempt to create a bond among members analogous to a familial tie. But in any event, there are many woman's fraternities out there, and any comprehensive view must take them into account.P22575R15 (talk) 23:39, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

We must agree to differ then: good luck with your article. Abtract (talk) 23:49, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Dude a women only fraternity does not exist. If it is women only it is called a sorority. As for the coed groups, I have no idea what they are supposed to be called.

You are right, but please sign your posts (~ ~ ~ ~; only without the spaces). As for coed organizations of this type, they are also fraternities. Latin nouns (these terms being derived from frater and soror, Latin for "brother" and "sister") have a masculine-form default for a plural noun with a mixed antecedent. (Kind of like the Latin words for graduate or veteran, Alumnus/Alumni (male) and Alumna/Alumnae (female). Recall that coed schools always spell their Alumni with an "i" rather than an "ae," and that only all-female schools such as Cedar Crest College and Gwenydd Mercy High School spell their Alumnae with "ae.") Anyway, a coed organization can also be a fraternity by virtue of having at least some male members and there being a masculine default both in Latin and, technically, in English. The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 06:23, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Phi Lambda Sigma paragraph removed

I have excised the following paragraph as unnecessary and probably self-serving. It is, additionally, incomplete and in need of editing near its end; and it should be wikified. But in fairness, I thought it best to post it here in case there exists some reason why it should be included in the article after all. (There is a list of four organizations as examples, so perhaps one should be replaced with Phi Lambda Sigma.)

“ One of the most prestigious fraternity and sorority of today is the Knights of Phi Lambda Sigma, founded January 17, 1914. The Plodians, Knights, or the Phi Lambdans are famous of their volunteerism and society outreaches. As of 2003, the 1914 is holding a record of 3086 chapters in United States of America, 548 chapters in Europe, and 4326 chapters in Asia and Southwestern part.The Phi Lambda Sigma greek letters are, ΦΛΣ 1914. ”

--SidP (talk) 18:03, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

What's with the names?

It might be obvious to Mircans and Brits, but for the rest of the world the mighty Phi Kappas don't mean anything. They're just pompous (because they're greek) and meaningless (Phi Kappa = FK = Fraternity Knights?). Also the self-high-five (The Epsilon Omega Something is the oldest and most respected, and Fubar Kappa Sigma is second to none) is annoying. Why are they respected? Apart a whole section on Guilds, which belongs in another article, there's just the funny confusion at the end about "female-only fraternities", which might, but might not, be called sororities. So. Why the greek letters? Why these? Any famous people revealing their membership? Any recent examples of fraternities doing... fraternity stuff? What's with the derogatory "frat boy"? Sorry about the rant, but the article is infuriating in its current state. 89.79.22.125 (talk) 20:01, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Discussion is for discussion of the article, not general talk about the topic. That said, this article as it stands seems highly biased, focusing on a few topics (especially exclusion) while ignoring many others (such as the actual activities of fraternal organizations!). This produces a very distorted perspective, for political purposes. NPOV flagging. KenThomas (talk) 21:54, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

IP, why do you think Brits understand this stuff? British universities don't have fraternities and sororities, and we find it largely incomprehensible. The concept certainly didn't get to America from Britain. I think it may be inspired by German traditions, but as with the Ku Klux Klan, it may be home grown. --Ef80 (talk) 20:57, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Probably because it did have British roots, which have not survived in a recognidable form. The Oxford and Cambridge Unions and the Bullingdon Club are examples, but the latter indicates affinities to the worse sides of 18th Century social clubs such as The Hellfire Club. The more reputable ones survive as Gentleman's Clubs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.217.82.7:4 (talk) 08:34, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

The Oxford Union is a private debating society, and the Bullingdon Club is a tiny dining club derived from nineteenth century foxhunting groups. Neither has the slightest connection with American campus 'greek life' fraternities. --Ef80 (talk) 23:43, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

The main difference between the older European organizations and the American organizations

"The main difference between the older European organizations and the American organizations is that the American student societies virtually always include initiations, the formal use of symbolism"

Oh cmon please, this is so wrong. Since I am part of an Italian univeristy society, I have to point this out: we have still initiations, parchments, feudal organization, good ol propedeutic strong herassment and all the bling-bling (medals, hats and our specific capes). You have to say that the differences between american fraternities and older european ones are these:

American fraternities have: frat houses,an insane budget in certain cases, chapters (same organization but other city), fund-rising events, charity,probably anti-smoking campaigns, sexual parity things, alchool regulamentations, herassment is forbidden. American fraternities is mostly divided by sex. There are sororities and brotherhoods. American initiations have had more than 70 deaths and countless paralyzed.

European ones may vary between nation and nation. Let's take Italy for instance (Bologna, A.D. 1088, first University in the world): no frat houses (someone rent small warehouses or a large cellars, otherwise they meet in bars), no budget at all, no funding of any kind (count on what they spare from parent's weekly allowance 10-20€?), they strongly encourage drinking, smoking, having sex, they base almost everything on psicologycal and verbal herassment. Italian fraternities are 99% mixed gender, no sororities or brotherhoods. They don't offer charity, they ask for it! They forbid every form of physical violence, but any other type of confrontation is largely valued. In Italy there are no chapters, and societies are relatively small (from 6 students to 30/40 usually) instead every major university (by our general rule) let its city to have it's own "territory": and that is usually different from the political regional borders. Every city has its chief organization, which rules all the other organizations in its region. Other cities may have whole different colours, names and hierarchy. The focal point is to meet all toghether, drinking smoking, battling all other fraternities because they suck, couch-surfing, making fun of each other yourself included, trying to boicot other's fraternities projects, stealing their symbols, blackmailing them (money is always forbidden: you can only ask and offer tobacco, alcohol and women (use irony) to pay your ransoms or your fails). And we never had an injury or a death at our initiations. Several alcoholic comas, more likely. The smartass you are, the most charisma you show, the most famous you'll became all across Italy, speaking of frat life of course. It may happen that you graduate, eventually.

That's the difference. Not the symbology, that believe me we strongly hail since centuries. Nor the initiations, since everyone has to do it here as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.193.38.252 (talk) 13:47, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

NPOV dispute

I have tagged this article for POV. Article focuses on alleged discrimination/exclusion and other topics, to the exclusion of other topics, in a manner that is transparently biased. KenThomas (talk) 22:03, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Humanism category

What's the reason the article is in this category? It seems to have been added with this edit (though I might have missed an earlier edit and this may be a restoration of that edit). Autarch (talk) 21:20, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Pledging

I ended up here because a biographical article mentioned that the person had "pledged" to a Greek letter organization. I then searched "pledging", but pledging redirects here. The subject is not mentioned in the article. Could someone who understands this stuff please add a paragraph about it to the article. Eclecticology (talk) 18:09, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Greek Life (and Redirection)

This is one of the least helpful entries on Wikipedia. My experience is exactly the same as Eclecticology's with their search on 'pledging'. I searched for "Greek Life" (not a term I have ever come across here in Europe, nor - until today - in a lifetime of reading US literature, watching US TV and movies etc.) and got redirected here. The article has no explanation of what Greek Life is - in fact it doesn't even mention it. Presumably it has something to do with the Greek letters used by US college fraternities, but one has to guess that.

Furthermore, the whole thing is a mess, which seems to be mostly to do with lack of NPOV, and some of you using the entry as a political football. According to the heading at the top of this talk page, "Fraternity is part of the Fraternities and Sororities WikiProject, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Greek Life on the Wikipedia'. (Of course, the term 'Greek Life' there simply redirects back here again). If that is so, then what is all the stuff about medieval trade guilds and the like doing in here? Either this entry is specifically about an aspect of US college culture or it's not. And if a topic - in this case "Greek Life" - is large enough to require an entire Wikiproject, surely it deserves and requires at least an explanation of what it is, even if you are not willing to give it an entry of its own? Liamcalling (talk) 02:31, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Revert?

@MSJapan: Why did you revert the recent edits like that? Chicbyaccident (talk) 11:52, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Because absolutely none of it is sourced. MSJapan (talk) 22:19, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. Indeed, ideally, any statements in the leading section - whether supported under the other headings or not - should be sourced too. Until they are, would consider contributing to its realisation rather than draconically erasing the past attempt to create a more universal and suitable leading section than the current version - in turn also completely without sources? Chicbyaccident (talk) 21:05, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

No, because you're trying to turn this into a dump article for three similar terms (which is a problem), and you're also sourcing to other Wikipedia articles, which is not allowed. I'm not going to try to contribute to an article where the other editor is displaying WP:COMPETENCE issues. You have no idea how to edit Wikipedia appropriately, and no desire to learn. MSJapan (talk) 16:51, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm just trying to make this lead section more appropriate. I really can't see how you can think that you reversed, unsourced, non-elaborated version is better? Hope you want to help to try to make it better, including adding appropriate sources! Chicbyaccident (talk) 21:08, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

@MSJapan: Just letting you know I see little to no selfref-ing in the revision you reverted. This isn't a comment on Chicbyaccident's conduct - if you disagree with my revert please feel free to revert and let me know on my tp cheers :) {{u|Samtar}} { Talk } 20:58, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

@Samtar: - I did respond on your talk, but there's some DB lag, so in case it disappears, you are correct in the sourcing change. The Wiktionary reference threw me off, and those still don't belong there. Moreover, I am not inclined to believe that the information attributed to three sources indicates a uniform definition. Upon checking that assumption, what is happening is that the three sources do not match each other, and are in fact being used to support not what the sources say, but what the author wants to say. I am reverting again for WP:SYNTH, and if the lede is to change, it will be discussed here before any changes are made. MSJapan (talk) 00:13, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

@MSJapan: In light of your recent reverts, could you please be more specific about what in the leading section that is not according to your preferences ? Thanks! Chicbyaccident (talk) 10:59, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

First of all, a fraternity, a fraternal order, and a fraternal organization are not the same. The latter two may be under certain circumstances, but there very specific connotations of a "fraternity" that have nothing to do with mystery orders and Oddfellows. This is something of which you may be unaware, but the fact remains that we are not going to call all of these things equal and put them in one article. Second of all, we are not going to a) appear to synthesize a definition out of multiple sources, b) add multiple sources to try to show that they all say the same thing when they do not, or c) simply make things up because an unsourced opinion appears to make them correct and stick sources on it to make it look correct. We are also not going to refer to any Wikimedia project when sourcing articles. In short, if you're going to rewrite the lede, you're going to rewrite it in line with both Wikipedia policy and subject matter guidelines. MSJapan (talk) 15:26, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Agreed that they differentiate, although arguably for the time being collectable in one single article. The "specific connotations" of fraternity are very broad in a universal sense. The rewrite I proposed certainly wasn't ideal and we need your help to make it better. However, the precedent version, that you reverted, doesn't really seem to reflect it much better - with 0 soources. Perhaps you may consider rewriting the latest version in order to indicate how you propose the contents to be? Chicbyaccident (talk) 17:44, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

@MSJapan: You're still asked to motivate your rigid revert. Chicbyaccident (talk) 21:03, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Student fraternities and sororities in North America

There is a page move request that is somewhat related to this page. We'd welcome your comments over at: this page. Tiggerjay (talk) 23:19, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fraternity. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160303231314/http://www.augnet.org/default.asp?ipageid=568 to http://www.augnet.org/default.asp?ipageid=568

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:09, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Vandal says take it to talk

A persistent vandal really likes the short word 'frat' and inserts it in the lead. Unfortunately this is in-between other, obvious vandal edits. 71.207.16.129, 174.200.24.86, 2600:1002:B106:2883:48A2:C4FC:D042:45F4, 2003:F1:13C9:700:C45F:6358:5F08:C4B9, and others. No need to engage, me thinks. Shenme (talk) 02:02, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

   Sounds from here like a very good call, esp'y in light of non-evidence of further controversy.
--2601:199:C202:287E:A91E:C2EC:2B75:58E (talk) 01:51, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Related move request

Please see: Talk:Fraternities and sororities. PPEMES (talk) 13:17, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

"Greek organization" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Greek organization. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 9#Greek organization until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. —Naddruf (talk ~ contribs) 02:40, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

"Male-only organisation" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Male-only organisation. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 October 30#Male-only organisation until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:40, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

"Civil fraternal order" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Civil fraternal order. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 November 9#Civil fraternal order until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. BDD (talk) 20:00, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

"Fraternity paddle" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Fraternity paddle. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 November 9#Fraternity paddle until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. BDD (talk) 20:05, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

"Fraternity ring" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Fraternity ring. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 November 9#Fraternity ring until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. BDD (talk) 20:09, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Syntax re "frater..."

   : A fraternity (from Latin frater: "brother"; whence, therefore, "brotherhood"), fraternal order, or fraternal organization is ... (adding two words), was my initial choice of syntax, but my syntax consultant, a high-grade professional advertising copywriter, strongly recommended killing my "whence". Tho I often ignore her advice (pointing out that she generally thinks that WP and I are at best equally obtuse amateurs, and she may just be blind to why (as i claim) "Yeah but WP is less conversational, more precise, and thus 'different'." Is it even conceivable that i am right in still insisting on "therefore"?? ... in this case and to that precise extent, at least? (...Tho i'm not fully convinced that even "whence" was unhelpful.)
--2601:199:C202:287E:A91E:C2EC:2B75:58E (talk) 01:51, 10 March 2019 (UTC)