Talk:List of Phi Kappa Tau members/Archive 1

Archive 1

Untitled

As interesting as it is to see famous alumni, seriously more work should be done on the actual Phi Kap article than this list. More edits have been done on this list in the past couple of months than the Phi Kap article. I question how famous many of these alumni are considering I have never seen so many redlinks on any list on Wikipedia. 71.108.128.3 02:12, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

While I am for an accurate list, I am wondering how notable or famous some people are. Under the religion section, there are a couple people who are senior pastors of undistinguished churches. Under the sports section there are four listing for groups of people who played on particular winning teams.

This type of article lends itself to crossing over encyclopedia line and becoming information overload for fraternity boosters. --Thunder 16:24, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Relevance of list

I agree with Thunder. This is the only fraternity that has a seperate list for notable alumni and several listed here aren't even "famous". Their notability comes from being part of an event or organization in which their role was minor. This is definetley fraternity overload and borderline candidate for deletion. --† Ðy§ep§ion † 03:01, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

I am a member of this particular fraternity and I find this list obnoxious. Wikipedia is suppose to be an encyclopedia not a rush tool. If I could have by druthers, I would have all “People list” (that goes for colleges too) cut back to the significant people and included in the main article (in this case Phi Kappa Tau). That might be a pipe dream since this is open source and people love to self promote by promoting their affiliations. With all that said, I think I will cut this list back and include a list in the main article. I will put an “also see” from that list to this big list so nobody gets their feelings hurt. --Thunder 17:29, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

I beg to differ. Having done a bit of work on this page, I would suggest that there are fairly important criteria for inclusion on this list. For example, politics and and government figures are all statewide or U.S. Government officials. U.S. distircit court judges, for example seem to me to be inherently notable. Start adding minor local officials, then you have overkill in my opinion.

Education figures are all college presidents or scholars of some note.

Business leaders are--for the most part--presidents or CEOS of businesses of some size or importance.

Sports figures are either head coaches at Olympic, college or professional levels or players who reached professional ranks and/or recived significant awards for college performance (NCAA champion, All-American, Hall of Fame, Olympian).

This may be the only fraternity that has a separate list of people. So what. Many of the folks listed on this page are also listed on the lists of college/university alumni that are almost always separate from the college pages. Many of the college alumni pages are quite lengthy and I find them to be fairly interesting. In fact, there is a growing list of categories of people by university affiliation.

I share concern that these can get out of control but there is a difference between "fame" and notability. I'd rather have the notability issue argued person by person. I say keep the list as is.152.163.100.7 01:45, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

I've been working on fraternity and sorority articles on here for a while. I've been trying to maintain an impartiality among the different organizations and also a consistency among the edits I make so that no one fraternity or sorority has some kind of Wiki overload. Your answer in regards to this being the only fraternity that has a list of notable alumni isn't a valid explanation. Colleges and universities should be treated in a different light. If this list were to ever go under Articles for Deletion I believe this list will be deleted. Those who regularly go on VfD don't have a particular interest for "fratcruft". The reason why I'm concerned is that having this list brings up the possibility of other fraternities making similiar lists. Perhaps you didn't notice but there are category lists of notable alumni of practically all fraternities except this one. Categories serve to differeniate between those who are really notable and those who aren't with the inclusion of the person's seperate Wiki article. Do with the list as you wish. I'm not going to put this list up for VfD lest I be accused of downgrading another fraternity. --† Ðy§ep§ion † 03:57, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Have you really looked at the categories of fraternity alumni? I considered ustablishing a category but found that most larger national/international fraternties DO NOT have categories and if they do, they have only one or two people categorized. Exceptions seem to be Phi Delta Theta and a very short list of others. In practice, prominent fraternity alumni are more commonly and consistently included in lists. I'm not sure why sonmeone crated a separate list for Phi Kappa Tau and not other orgs. I'm all for the categorization method (although I find many colleges and universities have categories and lists). I guess I've been more concerned about a proliferation of categories.70.104.113.101 19:39, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

I have to admit that I was not pleased when I saw that there was a seperate category for notable alumni of respecitve fraternities popping up. I thought that it was a useless category but apparently Wiki admins think otherwise. What's frustrating is that it seems that many of these categories in which very few names were placed, were created just for the sake of creation. No real effort was placed in them by the creator. These also include the Panhellenic sororities. I'll try my best to expand on these categories. --† Ðy§ep§ion † 21:21, 5 February 2006 (UTC)