Talk:List of social fraternities/Archive 1

Archive 1

Are the nicknames really useful?

I'm wondering what everyone's thoughts are on replacing the "nickname" category with the year they were created. To me, the nickname of an organization just isn't an interesting fact, not to mention most of them are likely either unsourced and/or unsourceable. I would find other facts about the organizations more interesting on a list like this. Bali88 (talk) 22:33, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Phi Gamma Delta

There was a discussion on the matter of Fiji's letters before on another seperate but related article. I don't recall the exact consensus. Please discuss the matter here before changing anything. --† Ðy§ep§ion † 21:20, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Downsized the flag that was used as the Phi Gamma Delta letters at the Phi Gamma Delta web page. This is approximately the same size as the letters in the currently used font. This is in reaction to yet another removal of the greek letters, presumably by a Phi Gamma Delta brother. Given the degree to which these edits occur, this was (perhaps a vain) attempt to come up with a workable compromise. Hopefully this will be acceptable to the Phi Gamma Delta brothers as well as the community at large. Naraht 18:42, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

I noticed this comment in the history

please see discussion and previous edits refering to this topic. I agree with you, but that is not the consenses.

Is there some discussion other than the two comments in this section that I'm overlooking? ENDelt260 16:28, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, there was a discussion on the Fiji discussion page. Frankly, I agree with the comment that we are not Fiji's and need to maintain our own standards. I myself edited the Fiji name to the Greek letters and my edit was reverted awhile back. I'd like to get a consensus here. Keylay 06:47, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

I am fine with the use of letters on the flag for FIJI. It seems to be bone of contention to them, and this seems like a good solution. Samwisep86 07:23, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Frankly, I don't see why wikipedia is using an outside organizations rules for how to depict the name of that organization. There is no need, from the wikipedia standpoint, to make any one greek letter fraternity's entry on this list stand out more than any other. I do not see consensus, but bowing to pressures of one group to give a non-neutral representation of that group. I'll note, we do have picture of Mohammed, even though Islam forbids that, do we not?--Vidkun (talk) 17:30, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps, as compromise, the letters for Phi Gamma Delta could be replaced by "FIJI"? The column in the table is titled "symbol", and, for all but seven extremely specific uses, "FIJI" is the symbol for Phi Gamma Delta. Additionally, a note could be added to mention that use of the actual Greek letters is barred except in those seven cases. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alatorr (talk • contribs) 22:01, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

I agree with Vidkun's comments above. Wikipedia is not censored and Phi Gamma Delta's bylaws apply only to its members.Naraht (talk) 23:38, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Possible removal of trivia

I wonder if the little notes and details should be removed from the list. They're not consistently present, and may list a founding location, an "interesting fact", or some other trivia that is not related to the purpose of this page: listing the organizations by letters, name, and nickname. Most of the groups have their own article, and nearly all those that don't could; these details belong there. Is there a general feeling on this issue? --SuperNova |T|C| 08:40, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

The nicknames are useful because some people looking for a group may only know the fraternity by the nickname, especially if they are unfamiliar with Greek letters. Other trivial data could probably be cleaned up though. Moof 20:00, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Beta Tau

Is beta tau a local or national frat? It seems local to me. In that stream, what is the "national" fraternity qualifier? --Samwisep86 06:24, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Depends on who you ask. Most fraternity histories that I've seen tend to see the second chapter as making them a national (i.e., a local has ONE and only one chapter; more than that and it's not a local -- ergo, must be a national). You could also argue that a national means being a member of NIC (or other appropriate national board - NPC, NPHC, whatever)... but there are some indisputable national fraternities that aren't (I think Kappa Sigma dropped NIC awhile back). Giving the benefit of the doubt to the organization, the litmus test for me would be that a second chapter means it can call itself a national, and that designation can go in WP. (Of course, I say that with the hunch that someone will no doubt take issue with the classification and possibly end up in a revert war -- but let's think positive!) So that's my position on the definition.

However! If it's this Beta Tau we're speaking of, it sounds local in every sense. I'll go ahead and move it to locals until a) we reach a consensus definition of a "national" and b) we find out that BT meets it.) --SuperNova |T|C| 07:05, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Size/popularity

The national chapters/headquarters of many fraternities and sororities are fond of letting members know their rank in terms of size among all national groups. For instance, Kappa Sigma has indicated that it is now the second largest fraternity in North America in terms of number of initiates. Does anyone know where these stats come from? QuinnHK 23:13, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

I've been looking in vain for these numbers for awhile. It's hard to find stats that don't come from the organizations themselves. Here's one listing that claims to be from a slightly-dated Beta Theta Pi pledge manual. I'd love to see a more up-to-date listing though. 00:26, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Here is another pretty comprehensive list. --SuperNova |T|C| 14:25, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Links

It would be nice to have links to the website of each greek society. I started on the national fraternities, but ended up just getting a bunch that I already knew. If you are in a fraternity or sorority and your website is not linked then go ahead and link it up. I'm going to try to come back and get a bunch again. Acidskater 19:50, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

This was a major point of contention for what Wikipedia is NOT; as in a "repository of links." The discussion was HERE. ScouterSig 13:23, 22 January 2007 (UTC).

Theoretically, each organization should have a link on its own wiki page in the infobox, so having the link reposted here again is unnecessary. —ScouterSig 20:12, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Alphabetical Order Proposal

We can have both Greek Letter Alphabetical *and* English Alphabetical if we use a sort table like the one for water area in List of U.S. states by area, Greek Letters will make up the first column, Spelled out greek letters (or english non-greek name like Farmhouse, the second and nicknames the third. I'd like to do this, any comments? Naraht 13:34, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Non-social

This page seriously needs to be edited because there seems to be a good deal of fraternities and sororities which are not social. If you know a certain fraternity or sorority that is listed that isn't a social one, delete it. Acidskater 02:18, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Article/Talk mismatch

Even though the article is List of social fraternities and sororities, when clicking discussion the talk page of Talk:List of social fraternities and sororities redirects to Talk:List of student organizations in North America (fraternities and sororities). This seems *really* odd. How do we make them match up?Naraht (talk) 13:43, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Conversion to table format

Would there be any objection to changing this list to a table format like this?

Organization	Symbol	Nickname
Acacia	AKAKIA	"A-kack" "AKAK" or "Acacian's"
Alpha Gamma Rho	AΓΡ	"AGR" or "Agger"

I think it would give the template a cleaner, more standardized look. Thoughts? -- Absolon S. Kent ^(chat), 20:49, Monday, November 25, 2024 (UTC)

Conversion completed. -- Absolon S. Kent ^(chat), 20:49, Monday, November 25, 2024 (UTC)

I have added the "sortable" function. This way, you could sort by both English and Greek letters.--Coquidragon (talk) 01:32, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

National umbrella organizations

• When someone adds an organization under one of the national councils, how much time should pass until that org appears in the coucil´s website?. For example, someone added LAY to NIC, but it is not listed in NIC´s webpage. --Coquidragon (talk) 14:32, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

• You need to contact the NIC and ask them. NYCRuss ☎ 14:35, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Emphasis

Since the other councils were created with special interests in mind, what do you all think about adding a "Traditional Emphasis" column to NIC and NPC orgs? Although today, most of them are all general social, it was not always like that. This would give us an idea of the organization history. These are some examples of what I mean.--Coquidragon (talk) 14:39, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Organization	Symbol	Traditional Emphasis
Acacia	AKAKIA	Traditional/Social [Masonic Tradition]
Alpha Chi Rho	ΑΧΡ	Traditional/Social
Alpha Delta Gamma	ΑΔΓ	Christian (Catholic)
Alpha Delta Phi	ΑΔΦ	Traditional/Social [Literary Society]
Alpha Epsilon Pi	ΑEΠ	Jewish
Alpha Gamma Rho	AΓΡ	Professional (Agriculture)
Alpha Gamma Sigma	ΑΓΣ	Professional (Agriculture)
Alpha Kappa Lambda	ΑΚΛ	Traditional/Social
Alpha Phi Alpha	AΦA	BGLO
Alpha Phi Delta	AΦΔ	Traditional/Social [Italian American]
Alpha Sigma Phi	ΑΣΦ	Traditional/Social [Secret Society]
Alpha Tau Omega	ΑΤΩ	Traditional/Social [Leadership]
Beta Chi Theta	ΒΧΘ	Asian (South Asian)
Beta Sigma Psi	BΣΨ	Christian (Luteran)
Beta Theta Pi	ΒΘΠ	Traditional/Social
Chi Phi	ΧΦ	Traditional/Social
Chi Psi	ΧΨ	Traditional/Social
Delta Chi	ΔΧ	Traditional/Social [Professional (Law)]
Delta Kappa Epsilon	ΔΚΕ	Traditional/Social [Secret Society]
Delta Phi	ΔΦ	Traditional/Social [Secret Society]
Delta Psi	ΔΨ	Traditional/Social [Literary Society]
Delta Sigma Phi	ΔΣΦ	Traditional/Social [Non-sectarian]
Delta Tau Delta	ΔΤΔ	Traditional/Social [Literary Society]
Delta Upsilon	ΔΥ	Traditional/Social [Non-secretive]
FarmHouse	FH	Traditional/Social [Professional (Agriculture)]
Iota Nu Delta	INΔ	Asian (South Asian)
Iota Phi Theta	IΦΘ	BGLO
Kappa Alpha Order	ΚΑ	Traditional/Social [Fraternal Order]
Kappa Alpha Psi	KAΨ	BGLO
Kappa Alpha Society	ΚΑ	Traditional/Social [Literary Society]
Kappa Delta Phi	ΚΔΦ	Traditional/Social
Kappa Delta Rho	KΔP	Traditional/Social
Lambda Chi Alpha	ΛΧΑ	Traditional/Social
Lambda Phi Epsilon	ΛΦΕ	Asian (Asian Pacific Americans)
Lambda Sigma Upsilon	ΛΣΥ	LGLO
Lambda Theta Phi	ΛΘΦ	LGLO
Nu Alpha Kappa	NAK	LGLO
Omega Delta Phi	ΩΔΦ	LGLO
Phi Beta Sigma	ΦBΣ	BGLO
Phi Gamma Delta	ΦΓΔ	Traditional/Social
Phi Iota Alpha	ΦΙΑ	LGLO
Phi Kappa Psi	ΦΚΨ	Traditional/Social [Service]
Phi Kappa Sigma	ΦΚΣ	Traditional/Social [Secret Order]
Phi Kappa Tau	ΦΚΤ	Traditional/Social [Non-Fraternity]
Phi Kappa Theta	ΦΚΘ	Traditional/Social [Christian (Catholic)]
Phi Lambda Chi	ΦΛΧ	Traditional/Social
Phi Mu Delta	ΦΜΔ	Traditional/Social [Commons Club]
Phi Sigma Kappa	ΦΣΚ	Traditional/Social
Phi Sigma Phi	ΦΣΦ	Traditional/Social
Pi Kappa Alpha	ΠΚΑ	Traditional/Social
Pi Kappa Phi	ΠΚΦ	Traditional/Social [Non-Fraternity]
Pi Lambda Phi	ΠΛΦ	Traditional/Social [Non-sectarian]
Psi Upsilon	ΨΥ	Traditional/Social
Sigma Alpha Epsilon	ΣΑΕ	Traditional/Social
Sigma Alpha Mu	ΣΑΜ	Traditional/Social [Jewish]
Sigma Beta Rho	ΣBP	Asian (South Asian)
Sigma Chi	ΣΧ	Traditional/Social [Literary Society]
Sigma Lambda Beta	ΣΛΒ	LGLO
Sigma Nu	ΣN	Traditional/Social [Anti-hazing]
Sigma Phi Delta	ΣΦΔ	Professional (Engineering)
Sigma Phi Epsilon	ΣΦΕ	Traditional/Social
Sigma Phi Society	ΣΦ	Traditional/Social [Secret Society]
Sigma Pi	ΣΠ	Traditional/Social [Literary Society]
Sigma Tau Gamma	ΣΤΓ	Traditional/Social [Literary Society]
Tau Delta Phi	TΔΦ	Traditional/Social [Jewish]
Tau Epsilon Phi	ΤΕΦ	Traditional/Social [Jewish]
Tau Kappa Epsilon	ΤΚΕ	Traditional/Social
Theta Chi	ΘΧ	Traditional/Social
Theta Delta Chi	ΘΔΧ	Traditional/Social [Secret Society]
Theta Xi	ΘΞ	Traditional/Social [Secret Society]
Triangle Fraternity		Restricted Social (Engineers, Architects and Scientists)
Zeta Beta Tau	ΖΒΤ	Traditional/Social [Jewish]
Zeta Psi	ΖΨ	Traditional/Social

This would need to be referenced and researched, or there could be editing fireworks. Before this is added, I think that a "Ref(s)" column should be added, and that this list should begin to get referenced as if it was going to be an FLC. NYCRuss ☎ 14:59, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

I have updated the table for all 73 orgs. The information comes from the wiki articles for each one. I have put inside brackets [] whatever emphasis the organization was founded upon. If the emphasis stands today (like BGLO, Professionals...), the are no () or []. NYCRuss, What do you mean by "Ref(s) column"?--Coquidragon (talk) 00:14, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

I agree with this. Personally, I find the historical focus of the organization to be far more interesting and useful than their nicknames. I see this conversation was started four years ago. Is there any reason it didn't go that way? Bali88 (talk) 17:40, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Double listings

I'm removing double listings. There aren't a ton of them, but as long as the article is, I don't think it's necessary. I think the best solution is to add them to the group that is shortest. For instance, Alpha Phi Alpha has dual membership with NAIC and NPHC. NAIC is a huge list, NPHC is short, so therefore, it should go in the NPHC section with a note that it also belongs to NAIC. That should improve readability, I think. Bali88 (talk) 21:22, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

I completely disagree. To do so is to indicate that its NPHC membership is somehow more valid than its NIC (never NAIC) membership. And I'm curious as to any other doubles that you have, the 4 NPHC Fraternities are the only ones that I know.Naraht (talk) 23:06, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

There were multiple doubles. If you look at the other tables of APIA and Latino organizations, there are multiple organizations with dual membership and then there were a few with dual memberships that weren't listed. I don't think it's implies anything about the worth of the memberships and the dual memberships are noted. But if we have consensus, I'll put them back. Bali88 (talk) 03:39, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Ya know, another option, which would simplify a lot of things, is to eliminate the headings that indicate the umbrella organization and put the umbrella organizations as a column. When I was looking for the emphasis, I found was that there are a number of smaller umbrella organizations that aren't listed here. I also discovered that a number of organizations listed under fraternities or sororities are coed. It's a bit misleading to include them under the fraternities heading if they are coed since there is a coed section at the bottom. We could have three graphs: mens organizations, women's organizations, and coed organizations as opposed to a graph for each overseeing body. That would eliminate the need to double list, it would be easier to understand, and all the information about each organization would be in one spot.Bali88 (talk) 05:30, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Alpha Iota Omicron

Is anyone familiar with this organization? Their national site lists it as a professional organization. I realize some professional organizations are still social as well, but I'm wondering if this one belongs on the page. Thoughts? Bali88 (talk) 21:32, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Locals

• I am putting this idea out to see what everyone/anyone thinks: if a local is put on here, they either need to have a wikilink OR a College/University listed where they are. This would mean that hundreds of these listed here would need to be referenced, located, or deleted. I am only trying to find a way to ensure that only legitimate organizations get put here; a recent edit seemed very suspicious, but it checks out. What do y'all think is the best way to do something? —ScouterSig 14:16, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

• That sounds good. A local fraternity needs to put where they are located and link it. That is usually the way I check to see if it is a real edit or vandalism. An article on the specific fraternity would also work. It good to see this list given some semblance of order.Samwisep86 03:40, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
• How about only listing locals with a valid wikilink? Simply listing a college or university does not verify that the group is valid. NYCRuss ☎ 11:07, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. Only locals with a valid wikilink Bali88 (talk) 22:42, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Locals

• Not all locals are at one campus only.

Chi Delta is a local sorority at California State University Sacramento, and Sonoma State University. There are Locals at other school that have more than one chapter.

• A local, by definition, only has one chapter. If it has a few, as mentioned in the above example, then it is regional. NYCRuss ☎ 11:09, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Alphabetical Order

If this has been done, correct me, but I'd like to get a consensus on whether this page should be ordered by English spelling of Greek letters (Delta before Gamma, Omega well before Zeta), as it is now, or by Greek alphabetical order, such that "Omega *" would come last. A recent editor added Omega Psi Phi at the end and I (evidently from an anon IP by mistake) moved it to the middle, but it struck me that a significant portion of readers might expect to find Omegas at the end (and Zetas near the beginning, etc.). Thoughts? --SuperNova |T|C| 19:29, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

I believe it should be done in the order of the Greek alphabet. Currently, it is neither in Greek alphabetical order nor in English alphabetical order. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.192.186.17 (talk) 09:47, 22 December 2006 (UTC).

The english alphabetical order follow the tradition set by Baird's Manual of American College Fraternities. Should you see a place where the GLOs are not in English Alphabetical order within the group, please correct it. Naraht 14:00, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

English alphabetical order would be easiest, especially because most people won't be able to understand as easily. I do love the greek alphabet though. Acidskater 19:30, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Cultural

I began sorting Cultural-interest fraternities and sororities to the other list, but I decided to go for a consensus. Personally, I don't think it's necessary to duplicate cultural-interest fraternities and sororities if there's a separate article devoted to them, just like we don't duplicate professional ones although they likely have a social aspect as well. -mercuryboard^talk ♠ 21:18, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

I know your post was some time ago, but I find this issue still remains. Before any changes are made, we need to consider the accuracy of the cultural list. Just because a group tends to have a certain kind of member (Lutheran, Catholic, African American, Italian, Latino, Asian, Jewish, Muslim) does not mean it cannot otherwise be a traditional fraternity or sorority; in fact, the opposite may be true. Some of the groups listed in cultural interest article were formed because their members could not join the other fraternities due to of racism, laws, and policies. Thus, many Jewish and African American fraternities are not "cultural" but traditional. Of course, the opposite may also be true. The determination of which article a fraternity or sorority goes on should be its primary focus, not where or not its members also fit into a racial or cultural group. That may take time to figure out--and will probably need to be checked regularly. Also, the cultural article duplicates content from other articles such as the list of Jewish groups and the list of Latino groups. Those entries be reduced to a Main Article link (something I will fix now). Rublamb (talk) 00:37, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Needs work

I'm planning to invest some time in improving the listing but wanted to make sure I wasn't duplicating effort. I believe a column for the founding institution would be useful, as would be something useful to sort on in a table. Headquarters city was another thought I had, but I think of much more limited value. As for "Greek or Latin crest writing" — except that "A few are in Spanish and in French" — that's neither here nor there. Either they are public mottos and we should list them as such or they are simply text that is part of the coat of arms, and no more deserving of a separate column than the colors on the coat of arms (as opposed to the colors of the organization). On a somewhat related note, coat of arms is the proper term, not crest (::fraternity:frat) and I would recommend adopting this nomenclature. - - choster (talk) 21:58, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

New Format

I've revised the article and changed it to a format that I think will be more useful. I've written up some guidelines for the page. If anyone has any feedback on these or other ideas, chime in.

Guidelines:

• No local (one chapter) organizations unless they have a current wikipedia page. Keep an eye on these entries. What I found when I went through the listings was that some organizations appeared to have a valid wikilink, but upon clicking on it, it's just a redirect to the university.

• National organizations (at least two chapters) without wikipedia pages can be added, but they MUST be sourced to at least one valid, reliable source. For the purposes of this page, self-published organization website is fine. The date the organization was started and their traditional emphasis are not self-serving data so a primary source is acceptable. Ideally all information on this list will eventually be sourced, but if someone wants to see sources for chi omega, they can just click on that article, so those without wikipedia articles are the bigger sourcing priority.

• When a new organization is added, put a link in the "see also" section of that article to this page. It may also help to put a note on the talk page reminding the author of that page that it is included on this list and to update the listing if any information changes (such as umbrella organization memberships). It would help if we could do this for the existing listings.

• I deleted organizations that identify themselves as service, professional, or honor societies. I realize that some of these organizations have a strong social component, so if there is evidence that this is the case, we can add them back.

• I have removed redlinks. When I was going through it, it appears that most of them had articles deleted for lack of notability and the ones that hadn't already been deleted had no evidence of notability. Before redlinking an article, consider whether the organization meets notability standards.

• I deleted the nickname category because the nicknames were unsourced, and in many cases unsourceable. Also, I'm not sure that it's a necessary part of the article. However, in a few cases, organizations are better known by their nicknames. In those circumstances, we can make a note next to the name in parentheses. Fiji is the only one I know of personally that is better known by their nickname, but if you know of another, add it. Bali88 (talk) 22:41, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Beta Sigma Phi

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 have moved them the List of general fraternitiesl Rublamb (talk) 18:33, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Consistent order?

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)

Should all be alphabetical now, rather than Greek letter order. Rublamb (talk) 00:40, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Dec 2022 edits

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)

My mention of WP Fraternities and Sororities style referred not to a standard for this type of article, but rather our overall efforts to 1) merge lists of active and inactive chapters and 2) the preference of a table's column sequence that begins with the organizational name, followed by chartered/range...ending with status and reference. In addition, recent projects have including moving extra information to efn. In short, I was working within the standards and preference we do have. As noted above, you do not have an issue with these changes.

Links to chapters: Originally, the organizational name was followed by the word "local" or "chapters". This data was in the same cell as the organization's name. At first, I did not realize that the word chapters had a link to either the chapter section of the organizational article or to the separate "list of chapters" article. It was not very intuitive in the way it was presented. I started by moving the data related to chapters or local to a new column for clarity. However, I noted that the infobox used in fraternity/sorority articles indicates local, regional, national or international--and felt like this was better terminology than "chapters" vs "local". This change had the added benefit of providing pertinent information for this overview.

I did make the bold decision that the link to the chapters was nice, not essential. My thought process was along the lines of NOS excessive linking because 1) all of these links either went to a section of the organization's article and the table already included a link to that article OR 2) the link went to a separate article that was also linked through the organization's article as a Main Article link. In other words, the table already provided access to the chapter information in a logical way.

I am still working on this article and will be adding sources and other missing details. I have not given up of finding a logical way of including a links to the chapters and would love to have suggestions in this regard. I am not against this being part of the table, just made the temporary decision that it was not working for my particular data set. I have also noted that the "see also" articles listed at the endo of this article present similar (but not the same) information in a wide variety of formats. I would also like to apply a generally accepted format to those articles, but would prefer agreement here first. Rublamb (talk) 22:09, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps too focused as an idea. could be create a template that is something like {{glowc|Mu Mu Mu}} becomes Mu Mu Mu (List of Mu Mu Mu chapters)?Naraht (talk) 10:02, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Such a template would require very consistent naming styles for the Chapter List pages. This would be helpful for the meta pages, with groups of nationals. Jax MN (talk) 16:22, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

I think this could be handled by redirects and anchors.Naraht (talk) 21:34, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

The other common subordinate pages would include lists of notable members, and links to founders. I don't know if that could be included in the proposed template, but it certainly would highlight the groups for which these pages are missing. Jax MN (talk) 22:47, 31 December 2022 (UTC)