Jump to content

Template talk:Infobox fraternity/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3

Additional parameter

I think it would be valuable to add a parameter field for Conference, to be centered in the template immediately below the field for {{{caption}}}. Many of these organizations belong to one of the major Greek Letter conferences, while the rest would be listed as former members of one ore more of these, or as locals.

For reference, the available North American conference links could be:

There may be others. This parameter ought to allow Wikilinks, affiliation with multiple conferences and additional modifiers, separated by commas, such as (former), (independent), or (local). Thoughts?
Jax MN (talk) 15:59, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Agree with the parameter, but I don't agree on the location. I think it should be down below with a label. To use the last example, I think simply having UCCFS without any explanation at the top is confusing, while having United Council of Christian Fraternities and Sororities in the same place is too long. I suggest Council as the most neutral Label. Naraht (talk) 19:02, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
Also, NAPA was an article and deleted, under the old name, National APIA Panhellenic Association Naraht (talk) 19:05, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
Your alternative placement suggestion sounds reasonable, and certainly it ought to have a label. Naming the parameter as "Council" or maybe "Association" would be fine. I wanted something which could allow for the word 'local' as well. "Nat'l Association" or "Nat'l Council"? As to the NAPA article, I'd left a number of redlinks in articles, assuming that one of us would get around to reviving and improving the original NAPA article. Clearly NAPA or NAPIDA is notable, with multiple citations available. I haven't yet investigated why the original was deleted. As a citation, the Baird's Online Archive will helpfully reference its member fraternities and indicates if they have an Asian or Pacific Islander affinity. Jax MN (talk) 19:32, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
Unfortunately, the term used into the template that these are in is "Greek Umbrella Organization" which I'd *really* prefer something better.Naraht (talk) 19:46, 26 April 2021 (UTC) They moved the NAPA article into my personal area at my request, If you've got references so we can move it back that would be great.Naraht (talk) 19:46, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
NAPA is relatively new, but is occasionally in the press. Here are a couple of external references:
As to "Greek Umbrella Organization", I agree that it isn't the best phrase. I don't see why we'd have to use it. Note too, I'd suggest that the template instructions clarify that this isn't for the name of a local Panhel (campus) group, but for a national association. Jax MN (talk) 19:58, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
I found another template with a formatting style for multiple affiliations that may work for us: {{Infobox university}}. See its affiliations param. I don't see this change as particularly controversial. You, Naraht, have experience in editing templates. Would you be so kind as to do this one? Jax MN (talk) 16:27, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Let's actually figure out what we're doing before we start editing the template. From the sounds of it, the plan at the moment sounds like having either an |affiliation= or |council= parameter, which would have a label and a switch statement that would link to one of the above options (e.g. input |affiliation=ACHS and it would output ACHS). Does that sound about right? Primefac (talk) 15:03, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
For positive entries, that seems fine. In the case of missing affiliations, or where the "affiliation" is simply 'local' or 'independent' or where a modifier like 'formerly' is needed, I'd like to ensure the parameter allows these words. Along with multiple affiliations: Alpha Gamma Rho for example is a member of both the PFA and NIC. Jax MN (talk) 15:36, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Well, the #default would be the input, allowing for multiple or non-standard values. Primefac (talk) 15:42, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
So the idea would be to allow for other inputs, but to have a fixed list of attributes that would cause links to specific pages. So |affiliation=ACHS would give ACHS but OTOH, |affiliation=FOOA woud give FOOA and |affiliation=FOOA would give BARNaraht (talk)
For the second one, I assume you mean it would be more like |affiliation=[[FOOA|BAR]], which would give BAR. Primefac (talk) 13:21, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

In other words: 

| dataX = {{#switch:{{lc:{{{affiliation|}}}}}
 | achs = [[Association of College Honor Societies|ACHS]]
 | cipfi = [[Concilio Interfraternitario Puertorriqueño de la Florida|CIPFI]]
 | ffc = [[Fraternity Forward Coalition|FFC]]
 | nalfo = [[National Association of Latino Fraternal Organizations|NALFO]]
 | napa = [[National APIDA Panhellenic Association|NAPA]]
 | nmgc = [[National Multicultural Greek Council|NMGC]]
 | nphc = [[National Pan-Hellenic Council|NPHC]]
 | npc = [[National Panhellenic Conference|NPC]]
 | nic = [[North American Interfraternity Conference|NIC]]
 | pfa = [[Professional Fraternity Association|PFA]]
 | uccfs = [[United Council of Christian Fraternities and Sororities|UCCFS]]
 | #default = {{{affiliation}}}
 }}

If an input doesn't match one of the pre-set values, then it will simply return that value without any formatting, meaning you can pass a Wikilink and it will display as intended. Primefac (talk) 13:26, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Primefac Thank you for expressing it! but I'm worried about Alpha Phi Alpha which belongs to both the NPHC and the NIC (and there are at least half a dozen more, NIC&NPHC or NIC&NALFO, I think. Is the dataX logic what would make both nphc and NPHC give the same result regardless of capitalization? And is there any way to extract "formerly" from the string and add it to the result? (yes, I'm looking for sprinkles on my Sundae. :))Naraht (talk) 14:00, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
I mean, we could in theory add a million different cases to the switch, but really I set it up like that just to keep some of the code cleaner (and yes, it is case-insensitive). I personally think that if the subject is part of two groups, then it would be added manually (e.g. |affiliation=NALFO and NIC). The other option would be to add an |affiliation2= param which would add the "and" in the above example. Regarding "formerly", I do not think we should include that option; if they're not in a council/conference, it should not be in the infobox (that sort of content is better for prose). Primefac (talk) 14:04, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
Jax MN which sprinkles do you want on your Sundae? :) I'd prefer affiliation2 but I agree with Primefac on formerly that it should instead be in Prose. Also, is there any way to count the number of articles in which this infobox use a particular parameter or even a particular value for a parameter?Naraht (talk) 14:43, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
This template uses TemplateData, so if a param is added it will show up there (lag time is a month, as the info is only cached on the first day), so if it's a more immediate need for tracking a tracking category should be set up. Primefac (talk) 14:53, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
Catching up, thanks for developing the code, Primefac, and to both of you for working through potential issues. The reason I hoped to allow "formerly" as one of the modifiers is its importance in suggesting their type. Phi Beta Kappa is formerly a member of the ACHS, certainly with no need to remain listed in that association: They are noteworthy enough. But articles for many lesser-known honor societies would benefit from the reminder that they once were ACHS, versus some other type. In that same vein, casual readers would appreciate understanding where FFC fraternities were previously NIC groups. It helps to clarify their niche. Next, I see you caught the issue of forcing all-caps where someone inputs "achs" vs. "ACHS". Good. Next, maybe the label for the param should be "Associations(s)" to allow for potential plural affiliations. Finally, there are at least 150 articles for local fraternities or literary societies where the param would be "local". As a Term of Art within the fraternal world, that word probably deserves its own link or definition. Outsiders may not know what "local" means in this context. Jax MN (talk) 16:08, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
For local, I suggest a link to Fraternities_and_sororities#Glossary. My guess is that a majority of formerly aren't FFC, they are either groups that left the PFA and ACHS or were NIC/NPC that merged with other groups.Naraht (talk) 15:09, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
I would argue that's more of a type than an affiliation. If a group isn't affiliated with any council, coalition, or conference (etc), then this parameter wouldn't be used. Primefac (talk) 16:11, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
Primefac, Jax MNBumping. And I agree that "Local" and IFC are not measuing the same thing. Kappa Beta Gamma is outside all of the affiliation groups, but isn't Local.Naraht (talk) 19:41, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Are we all good with calling it "Affiliation"? If so, I'll update the template. Primefac (talk) 11:46, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
I support the change. Thanks! Jax MN (talk) 16:27, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
Primefac Any progress on this? *Thank you for your work on this!*Naraht (talk) 13:18, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
 Done. Primefac (talk) 15:26, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Working!

Thank you Primefac! I have added it to Alpha Phi Omega. I added affiliation to the list of acceptable parameters at the bottom. Let's see how that works and see how much need there is for affiliation2.Naraht (talk) 22:27, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Were one of you adjusting the page description and template on the article: Template:Infobox fraternity? Looks great. Jax MN (talk) 00:43, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
I've just added the affiliation param to several of the NAPA fraternities. Looking at Beta Chi Theta they are members of both NAPA and the NIC. Does use of both acronyms separate by a comma, does this negate their Wikilinks, requiring manual links? Jax MN (talk) 13:22, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
I think I've added what neads to for the document.Naraht (talk) 14:58, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
Yes, it will negate the wikillinks. That's (and Alpha Phi Alpha and the other NPHC/NIC groups) was the reason that affiliation2 was also proposed.Naraht (talk) 14:58, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Affilation2

So, what would affilation2 look like. Same as affiliation, but if it exists, it would simply have ' and ' and then the same set as the first? Also, we know of at least 5 groups that need two groups (Beta Chi Theta and the NPHC Fraternities other than Omega Psi Phi) how many more? I'm excluding the entries where one or both is a "former" (the ACHS crossovers with the PFA(and its predecessors) would actually be the worst). Do we have any triple affiliations?Naraht (talk)

Oh, yeah, forgot about that. I can add it in. Primefac (talk) 22:03, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
I cannot think of a triple affiliation. Such a situation would be expensive, and I know the major fraternities well enough to know their affiliations, limited to one or two. Jax MN (talk) 03:33, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Progress

Completed groupings. (making and adding to this list as we go). This assumes the list of current and former members on each of these linked WP articles is accurate:

  • ACHS - Former groups done. Active groups updated through end of Alpha (many infoboxes added) - Did a search for the ACHS Category without an infobox. 20 of them. Can't add the affiliation if they don't have an infobox. So we have to create the infoboxes... (Naraht)
  • CIPFI - Completed. (Jax_MN)
  • FFC - Completed (Jax_MN)
  • NALFO - Active groups completed. Some of the former groups may still need annotation. (Naraht) Former groups now noted. (Jax_MN)
  • NAPA - Completed. (Jax_MN)
  • NMGC - Completed (those with WP pages). There's a discrepancy on the website and WP, one group may have dropped. (Jax_MN)
  • NIC - Completed: active, former and dormant (Jax_MN)
  • NPC - Completed: active and former. (Jax_MN)
  • NPHC - (Affiliation done by Banan14kab, Naraht added affiliation2 for APHiA, KAPsi and IPhiTheta, (and found to his surprise that PhiBS was no longer NIC))
  • PFA - Completed: current and former groups (except a few former affiliates without infoboxes). One exception: Concatenated Order of Hoo-Hoo, listed on the PFA page, but not on the PFA page. I wrote to both organizations. Listed in error? (Jax_MN)
  • UCCFS - Completed (I may have done these; it was late. Heh. Jax_MN)
  • local groups with WP article on our watchlist are now noted with "local" as scope; For these I did not use the affiliation param. (Note, this is IF they have Wikipedia articles AND infoboxes) (Jax_MN)
  • non-affiliated or never-affiliated national groups should be updated using the unlinked word "independent" on the affiliation parameter line.

I've placed a manual link in the affiliation field and the word "(former)" to show groups that have left one of the conferences. Jax MN (talk) 13:17, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Looks like we will need another affiliation group. Four of the premier Honor societies have formed a consortium called Honor Society Caucus. No WP article yet. These are: Phi Beta Kappa, Phi Kappa Phi, Sigma Xi, and Omicron Delta Kappa.[1][2]

Note, I fixed the second of these references to omit the spurious mirror site "honorsociety.org", which seems parasitical and maybe a scam. I don't know why they were advertising the Caucus.
I added a paragraph on the ACHS page, within the Former Members section, to talk about the Honor Society Caucus. I created a page name redirect to this section. I see that Phi Kappa Phi mentions it, listing all the members on a page on their website, which seems proof enough. Curiously, the other three members don't have a mention of it that I can see from a cursory review. But Purdue University also mentions them. I therefore do not know when the group was founded, nor its parameters. I assume that these large, established groups don't need much in the way of support, and don't want to pay ACHS dues. But they use the Caucus for lobbying, perhaps. I've updated all four articles so that each mention their prior membership in the ACHS, and their current participation in the Caucus. Still to do, add the Caucus to this Affiliation param for the infobox, and update the template to reflect these four former members as part of a new group. Jax MN (talk) 04:35, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Merged?

For quite a few of the inactive fraternities, it would be appropriate to have a "Merged Into", especially if it was a clean addition like Phi Kappa into Phi Kappa Theta or Pi Lambda Sigma into Theta Phi Alpha. I'd suggest merged_into and merged_date so

merged_into=[[Theta Phi Alpha]] merged_date={{dts|1952|8|1}}

would come up as

Merged Theta Phi Alpha on September 1, 1952

or something similar (maybe don't combine the lines?) Naraht (talk) 14:17, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

I think it would be much more useful to have a freeform "fate" field, as Infobox company does, which could be used to indicate a merger, denationalization (e.g. Delta Kappa), or dissolution among other fates.-- choster (talk) 21:06, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
I'm good with fate, allow for Iota Alpha Pi to be described more cleanly.Naraht (talk) 16:01, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
Any one object to fate?Naraht (talk) 22:10, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
The Delta Kappa example is useful, to consider options. I have been working on a number of infobox updates; some would indeed have an obvious need for a "fate" param at times. But for many, the three 'free' fields have worked well. An example is the infobox for Lambda Omega. I inset the secondary target (using free1) for a later merger, and by happenstance these fields all tend toward the bottom of the infobox. By placing the date in parentheses it looks pretty clean. In addition to a known merger partner I've used words like "scattered" after the label "Merged into?" I've landed on what appears to be a solution for all these, then another twist appears. The outcomes of all these groups are each a little dissimilar. I've used these "merged with" free labels several dozen times, but look forward to hearing other ideas.
Sigma Mu Sigma is another wonky one, where the normal rules don't fit. Take a look to see how I handled it there, and let me know if you've an alternate idea. Jax MN (talk) 01:36, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Restart

Yes, I see that there are a lot of possible fates. I still like having fate = ... but, to keep the flexibility, I think that it should go in the "natural" place, last, which is just before the free & free label entries (and after everything non-free).Naraht (talk) 22:45, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

OK. Let's flip this around, does anyone have a *problem* with Fate being added just before the free/free_labels. If no one comments by the end of February, I'll be Bold and add it. For complicated ones, we can either use Fate with the "Free"s or just leave as "Free"s.Naraht (talk) 20:09, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

I wish I could think of a short word between "fate" and "outcome" in its emotional weight. Fate certainly works, but it's got that "drumbeat of doom" vibe. Jax MN (talk) 20:27, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
Agreed. And fate doesn't really seem the right emotion for the equal mergers of healthy-ish groups into a new name like
  • Omicron Nu and Kappa Omicron Phi into Kappa Omicron Nu
  • Phi Kappa and Theta Kappa Phi into Phi Kappa Theta
Outcome does seem more neutral, but I agree it doesn't quite fit either.Naraht (talk) 20:48, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "Honors Societies - Honors College - Purdue University". honors.purdue.edu. Retrieved 2021-09-06.
  2. ^ "Honor Society Caucus | Honor Society". www.phikappaphi.org. Retrieved 2021-10-22.

Not properly handling status

Primefac - Adelphian Society has had a Status added that isn't Active, but still shows up in the website missing cat.Naraht (talk) 15:06, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

 Fixed. Primefac (talk) 15:11, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
Re: the status param, I do not see it expressed among the other parameters of the template found on the Template:Infobox fraternity article, which is the template I'd always used when writing GLO articles. Is this an omission? I've not spent much time looking into the metastructure of where template markup language is derived. Jax MN (talk) 17:09, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
I'll be honest, I never update /doc pages, usually because I'm doing a flyby TPER request and don't know how folks want to display the param. This time I just sort of forgot, mainly because of that habit. Primefac (talk) 11:13, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Handling suffixes.

Moved from WP:FRAT

Primefac For both the status and the affiliation, right now the infobox does something based on the value of the field. For status it determines whether it goes into the category indicating a need for websites, for Affiliation, whether the value should be wikilinked. However in both places, for quite valid reasons, it makes sense to have a suffix, either a date of merger/going defunct and for Affiliation, the addition of the word former. Can these be changed so that the action only evaluates the first part of the string (string of alphas (UC or lc)) to do this. So for example, since "affiliation = NIC" generates "Affiliation [[Northamerican Interfraternity Conference|NIC]]" that it could also have "affiliation = NIC (former)" generate "Affiliation [[Northamerican Interfraternity Conference|NIC]] former"? (and status = Defunct *and* status = Defunct (1876) both cause it to not look for a website?) Naraht (talk) 14:21, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

I would rather have multiple parameters with individual values than have to split out one parameter to do multiple things. If we want to indicate when a GLO went defunct, then we should have a parameter for that. If we want previous affiliations in addition to current affiliations, we should have a separate parameter for that. Primefac (talk) 15:12, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
OK based on this, it sounds like the following should be added.
  • former_affiliation
  • former_affiliation2
  • merge_date
  • merge_target (what it merged into, better term?)
  • defunct_date

Naraht (talk) 01:44, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Added Former_Affiliation to template

I added Former Affiliation and Former_Affiliation2. These have the same choices as Affiliation and Affiliation2 plus AES (Association of Education Sororities), PPA (Professional Panhellenic Association) and PIC (Professional Interfraternity Conference). With that, I'm not sure what other umbrella organizations should be added to the possible Former Affiliation.Naraht (talk) 06:39, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Adding "Former Affiliation", etc, as a parameter is a really helpful addition. Thanks for handling it.
Naraht, would you add links to AES, PPA and PIC when these show up? For example, looking at Omega Upsilon Phi, PIC shows as its former affiliation, but casual readers won't know what that abbreviation stands for, nor would they be easily able to find its history. Jax MN (talk) 19:34, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
Also, this may need to be addressed: See Delta Sigma Epsilon (sorority) for usage of "AES" and how it renders. Is this just a typo, where a slash was substituted for a pipe? Jax MN (talk) 19:39, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
Jax MNThank you for finding both of these issues! the PIC one is because while I changed it to PIC, I didn't make it a former_affiliation. PIC will only link when it is a former. PIC hasn't existed since the merger in 1977 with the PPA. As for AES, yes, that was a typo in the template, now fixed.Naraht (talk) 21:23, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Level or Environment Parameter???

Moved from WP:FRAT

I'm looking at all of the entries in type and was thinking of a separate parameter indicating where members could be taken from, but I'm not quite sure what would be the best name.

  • High School
  • Undergraduate
  • Graduate
  • Community

there could be multiple here, Alpha Phi Omega for example, allows both Undergraduate and Graduate students. Naraht (talk) 09:57, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Is this a useful thing to have in the infobox? Genuinely curious, but it seems like an exception rather than a rule that a GLO would take folks other than uni students (and for the record, I don't necessarily think the UG/Graduate distinction to be particularly useful). Primefac (talk) 15:15, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
There are at least 16 groups (not counting redirects) using this that are for High School students (and in some cases two year colleges) in Category:High school honor societies and at least the same number of Graduate only (between Law School and Medical School fraternities (exclusing pre-med and pre-law)).Naraht (talk) 18:17, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
|member_pool= could be a name, or maybe |open_to=. Primefac (talk) 11:17, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Good catch. I don't know if we need a new parameter or to develop guidelines within our current structure. For example, using a combination of Type and Emphasis to convey this info. Maybe the Beta Club would be Type: Honor Emphasis: High School, for example. A collegiate/community-based group could either be Type: Social Emphasis: Community and collegiate OR Type: Community and collegiate Emphasis: Social.
I have been using the lifetime field for high school and non-collegiate groups as a workaround for the automatic insertion of the word "collegiate" in the Members field. It became an issue when I started working on high school honor groups. Then, I noticed it was also a problem with groups that initiate members into both collegiate and community-based chapters. I am not as worried about graduate schools as those are technically still collegiate members. Would a solution be to replace the word "collegiate" with "active" in the Membership field? I realize that is not a perfect solution as some groups consider their alumni members to be active.
" Rublamb (talk) 22:26, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Additional Umbrella abbreviation:KSCV

As I see it, there are 11 members of the KSCV - Kösener Senioren-Convents-Verband that have wikipedia pages on enwiki (and another 5 or so on dewiki that aren't here). Not all use this template, but I guide to how much it can be used. that puts ahead of the FFC for example.Naraht (talk) 21:20, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Figuring out the newly found European umbrellas was on my short list of projects. Since I did not take German, I sometimes have to ask my husband to look at the weird translations and/or the dewiki verson--and the really long words kinda freak me out when proofreading (do I keep the German word or translate into English, etc.) So, I am very happy that you are addressing this! Are we getting to the point of a template? Rublamb (talk) 22:17, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
KSCV added. A few were changed to allow the template to link, several in the list at Kösener Senioren-Convents-Verband aren't using infobox fraternity and should. Also one links to SC and I moved that to affiliation2 to allow the autolink for KSCV.Naraht (talk) 02:15, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Affiliations mostly done, current status

The following entries are still in Category:Pages_using_infobox_fraternity_with_missing_affiliation

  1. ) Blaues Kartell. It looks like things are a bit more complicated with the umbrellas in Germany. You have Weinheimer Senioren-Convent which has corps in it, but some of those corps are in Cartels like Blaues Kartell and Viererbund. So maybe like if the groups that joined the NPC from the AES had stayed unified under the AES?
  2. ) Commons club Not sure this can be touched until the article is split (into at least two if not three pieces)

Also, having "affiliation =" with no data and "former_affiliation = blah" counts has a missing affiliation. Surprised, something to keep an eye on.

Now for the verification, going *from* the umbrella groups to make sure that members/former members have the right affiliations. Naraht (talk) 16:05, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Future of both infobox and filling in values.

Yes, that is a grand title. :) Current thoughts
Existing Fields.

  1. ) affiliation - Every group should have an affiliation. If it hasn't been part of any we recognize, it gets independent. Note this will include all of the Filipino groups, for which there is nothing to affiliate to.
  2. ) former_affiliation. If a group is/was part of the PFA and was part of either PPA or PIC prior to the merger, then PPA & PIC count as former_affiliations.
  3. ) status - 3 or 4 valid values depending on how we count Unknown. Active, Merged & Defunct. See below for ideas.
  4. ) Affiliation comment. the comment with the list on a lot of affiliation2 giving the list of choices, I figure we can trim out of the articles, while leaving in the version at the template.

New Fields

  1. ) defunct_date
  2. ) merge_date
  3. ) merge_target. (only needed if this group is going away. Could be a merge into (Phi Alpha -> Phi Sigma Delta) or a merge of equals (Phi Kappa and Theta Kappa Phi -> Phi Kappa Theta) . This field can handle both "legal" merges like the two before *or* a case where Defunct Date is set and the field is something like Alpha Tau Omega and scattered.

Other unrelated...

  1. )"member_pool= could be a name, or maybe open_to=" Any ideas on this (this could be like Graduate Students, but trying to figure out how this and emphasis relate, in a case like "Only takes Law Students."

Naraht (talk) 20:48, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Mulling this over, several degrees of merger are used. There standard mergers, like Theta Chi and Beta Kappa. There are mergers of relative equals, along with those where the merged partner is clearly junior. There are situations of very small nationals that are absorbed. There are pick-offs, where one or more chapters join (or are released to join) another national, not the focus of a main merger. There are also scattered defections. All this in mind, I like the neutral-sounding term "Successor" as opposed to "Merged with" or some variant. Jax MN (talk) 21:34, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Its looks good. I like Successor because sometimes the merger results in a new name. Rublamb (talk) 22:10, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
I'll add defunct_date, merge_date and successor, I don't think anyone has spoken on it. And they would go immediately after status.
Possible code behind this to be added:
  • defunct_date should only show if status = Defunct (error to maint cat?)
  • Merge_date should only show if status = Merged. (error to maint cat?)
  • Successor only shows if merge_date???
Naraht (talk) 18:45, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
That added code makes sense. Rublamb (talk) 18:53, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Not totally sure I know how to do these, worst case, I'll just add them without the limitations and ask Primefac. :)Naraht (talk) 19:08, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
It is not the end of the world if this doesn't happen. Rublamb (talk) 19:44, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Added. Use https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&limit=500&offset=0&ns0=1&ns1=1&ns2=1&ns3=1&ns4=1&ns5=1&ns6=1&ns7=1&ns8=1&ns9=1&ns10=1&ns11=1&ns12=1&ns13=1&ns14=1&ns15=1&ns100=1&ns101=1&ns118=1&ns119=1&ns710=1&ns711=1&ns828=1&ns829=1&search=insource%3A%2Fstatus+%2A%3D+%2AMerged%2F+fraternity+-insource%3A%2Fmerge_date%2F to get a list of the Merged groups without a merge date. Also, in my head at least, if a date (MDY) can be found for the merger go ahead and include it.Naraht (talk) 21:25, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
What about transitory mergers? Naraht recently updated Pi Delta Theta to show its successor group of Delta Sigma Epsilon. The infobox now helpfully reflects that merger target using the new parameters. HOWEVER, that recipient sorority went on to merge into Delta Zeta fifteen years later. Ought we include a secondary merger partner in the original infobox, or leave this as a two-step investigation process for readers looking into the matter? I don't have a strong preference, balancing between clarity demands on both sides. Jax MN (talk) 16:21, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
I don't think so. The later merger would be shown in the next group's infobox Rublamb (talk) 17:45, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
I gave that thought as I deleted that information. It isn't the only A -> B ->C , but a good chunk of the others are ultimately either into ZBT or AEPi. I'd only want a second successor if the two groups actively/officially split the merging group. We don't have to include everything in the Infobox, and if the user wants to follow what ultimately happened, it is in the text as well as on the Delta Sigma Epsilon Page.
OK. That's reasonable. Jax MN (talk) 19:34, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Merged groups are done. In general, I used the dts template if there are exact dates of mergers, but bare year if that is all we currently have that will sort of help sort things out, but I'll want to look at things again when the monthly param report drops. (The count for status = merge and merge_date = something should match). One lesson appears to be that we may not want to restrict successor to only merge groups, it looks like there may be cases where a group went defunct and another sorority picked up those chapters sort "from the floor" in a way where calling it a merge doesn't make sense.Naraht (talk) 16:43, 11 July 2024 (UTC)


Single Chapter

If a local fraternity has a wikipedia page and it joins a national fraternity, is the successor "Mu Mu Mu" or "Kappa chapter of Mu Mu Mu"?Naraht (talk) 01:05, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

I think it would be "Mu Mu Mu". Body text and/or an EFN would carry the information about Kappa chapter, and whether it became a new chapter or merged or revived a pre-existing one. Jax MN (talk) 09:40, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
I may not be specifying the example situation well enough, but I'm not sure. At University of California, Berkeley Omega Omega was founded at in 1862 making it the oldest Greek Letter Organization on the Pacific Coast and as such there is an Omega Omega page. It stayed active until 1979 when it became Kappa chapter of Mu Mu Mu. In the infobox of Omega Omega, which has a merge_date of 1979, is the successor parameter value "Mu Mu Mu" or "Kappa chapter of Mu Mu Mu". (Sorry if I'm repeating myself)Naraht (talk) 12:33, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
I had similar situations come up when constructing pages to list all the GLOs at a school. A one-for-one merger of a chapter from ABC to DEF fraternity simply shows the new Greek letters - we have consensus on this. Fair enough. But there were times where I'd used "(see DEF)" to call out the step-up to a new, or later organization where there was a series of name changes. The "(see DEF)" name being the final destination after a series of mergers.
Again, I think that it is sufficient to note the resulting chapter name in an EFN or REF body text, and have moved away from declaring the resulting chapter name in the notes field (or in the infobox, per your question). Jax MN (talk) 16:25, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Defunct Date

Looking at Alpha Mu Sigma. National Organization disbanded in 1963, Alpha chapter continued until 1971, which is the defunct_date and does it matter if it is another chapter other than Alpha? Naraht (talk) 17:44, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

I don't think so. The date of demise should reflect the last survivor under that name. Jax MN (talk) 17:52, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
OK, so combining this and some of the other statements, are we agreed on....
  • Mu Mu Mu is founded a school A in 1920
  • Mu Mu Mu expands to schools, B, C, D & E by 1930.
  • chapters A, B, & D go inactive in 1940
  • chapters C& E meet at convention to officially dissolve the National Organization in 1950
  • chapter at E goes inactive in 1955
  • chapter at C stops admitting undergradute members in 1960
  • Alumni organization of C decide to create community chapters in the 1960s
  • last of the community chapters that can create new brothers goes inactive by 1970
  • alumni of C and nearby community chapter continue to have meetings as an organization to sponsor fun run for cancer until 1980.
When would they be considered defunct and what would the defunct date be? (and yes I've run into just about everypieces of this while doing the merged and defunct chapters)Naraht (talk) 18:04, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
I feel your pain. Since we include community / non-colegiate groups in the WP, moving from collegiate to community-based would not mean defunct. Defunct is either when the national closes, meaning all chapters close or any remaining chapters become independent local groups OR when it stops admitting new members. The latter seems to fit many honorary groups. I don't consider a gradually shrinking alumni group as an "active" GLO for our purposes. Note that even though a local group might continue the legacy of the original national GLO chapter, it is still not the same fraternity/sorority if the national leadership voted to cease operations. That is why we have the "withdraw" status for the chapter list, meaing a chapter that does not follow the closure/merger directive of the national GLO.
The date would be either that date established by the national board's vote or that last year any mmbers were indiated, depending on what we can find in the sources. Rublamb (talk) 19:47, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
I generally agree with what Rublamb just said. In your hypothetical, above, I'd suggest that the year/date of demise is "chapters C & E meet at convention to officially dissolve the National Organization in 1950". The status params would then read "Withdrew (local)" with an EFN noting that the chapter continued under the same name with little or no cooperation with the other local chapter. If alumnae chapters would continue to exist or be formed under a formal chartering process, then that date of demise would be pushed off, indefinitely. Body text or a separate table could track these. The local undergrad or alumnae chapters would trigger a closure date independently. And when the national body decides to cease awarding chapters, that would be the date of demise, as elaborated in body text. Jax MN (talk) 20:32, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
Do we distinguish between alumni/graduate chapters and alumni organizations? I think these are not the same thing. The former often continue to add members, undertakee volunteer projects, hold regular meetings, and host social functions. The latter serve as holding corporations for undergraduate property (sometimes rented to other groups once the chapter closes), manage donations and scholarships, and might have an annual meeting to elect officers of the corperation. The difference being the social/service function and the continued addition of members, along with different IRS designations.
Not to get too deep in the weeds, but I remember a former high school fraternity that has closed all chapters, but still has the dregs of a national board, with hopes or organizing alumni reunions. Nothing has taken place for years, other than a website that was last updated maybe a decade ago. I would consider this defunct, despite five people being on the board. No one from the group has complained about my edits calling it inactive. Maybe that is the ultimate test? Rublamb (talk) 20:49, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
I think, in general, we're getting too picky/pedantic/choose-your-phrase about this sort of stuff. An infobox for a national fraternity (or one that claims to be) should have a defunct date for when they collectively decide to stop being a fraternity (the "C & E decide" in the hypothetical above). If (from immediately above) the high school fraternity closes all of its chapters, that's the defunct date, not when a handful of alumni decide that they still want to get together and drink beers. Anything after the defunct date can (and should) be dealt with in prose in the body of the article; an infobox should be a quick summary of the major points, not getting into the weeds of exactly when the last person decided they no longer wanted to be associated with the group. Primefac (talk) 19:57, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
Quite happy with this, found a few that I was so split that I wrote the defunct_date as "19XX (formally dissolved 19WW)" where 19WW was earlier and change the defunct_date to 19WW.Naraht (talk) 23:45, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

SPURS

So given the above, should SPURS be status=Active, (status=Defunct, defunct_date=2005) or something else?Naraht (talk) 16:59, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

I say Defunct, 2005. Even the fate the 3 chapters that attempted to continue is sketchy. Rublamb (talk) 17:19, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
In the same spirit as immediately above.Naraht (talk) 23:45, 13 July 2024 (UTC)


Last Five

There are five left that I'm not sure of either status, a defunct date within a decade or both... Please take a look.

  • Phi Lambda Kappa - More than a dozen chapters listed as active, but set as Defunct in the infobox?
Unknown: I believe it is defunct as it has not web presence, either at the colleges, social media, or the national. But I have not been able to prove it. Note that no one has complained about my listing it as defunct.
  • Delta Phi Delta - Really seems to have fizzled out with "dormant in the late 20th century, but two chapters (later one) continuing to act as local groups
Defunct: I heard from the faculty advisors of both local groups, who were not aware of the other. They said it has long been inactive. And, one chapter just changed its name this year.
  • Wine Psi Phi - Conflicting claims to name, Graduate chapter in Chicago vs. New group in Durham NC. Should it even count as Defunct?
Defunct: It officially closed at the national level decades ago. The two local groups that are fighting over the legal name are alumni reboots/dregs that are not collegiate and more of regular community organizations.
  • Scabbard and Blade - I can't find any reference to the National society closing its operation and it is listed as having a website, but that website doesn't really show connection to the chapters.
Defunct: The linked website is for a local chapter and should be moved to External Links. I found its closure somewhere; not like me to skip the source. I will backtrack.
Okay. Not a usable source but confirms the status. See this.
Given the dates in the reddit, I'm going with 2019 for a defunct_date with a ?
  • Chi Iota Pi - Unclear whether all of the chapters are gone, but given how difficult it has been to find anything and how most of the refs are primary on their old website, I'm tempted to put up for AFD
Unknown: I believe all chapters are inactive, as they are no longer listed as part of the university's Greek life. But it is still unknown. I cannot remember if I did a hunt through social media, so will double-check there.
Since I worked on these articles, I have responded above. Rublamb (talk) 17:23, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
Not sure if changing PhiLK or ChIP to Unknown would be better, and I'll added 2019 for S&B as a defunct_date.Naraht (talk) 22:15, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Birthplace

School only? there are some birthplaces that look like:

Unless the school has two different campuses, but with only one wikipedia page, I think it should be trimmed down to the college only. (Yes, I know that there are some formed elsewhere, but this seems to cover about 90%.)Naraht (talk) 23:55, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

I agree; get rid of the city when there is a college, university, or high school. The exception would be those groups that were formed at random locations within a city, with no official institutional connection. Then, it would be appropriate to include the city, state/province. It should be added to the infobox template instructions. Rublamb (talk) 20:18, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
Hit a few times. Either "abcd college (now efgh university)" or "efgh university (previously efgh college)" Allow for this? Iota Phi Theta and some of those founded at the previous groups to Colgate are good examples.Naraht (talk) 17:56, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
Also, when it includes a specific location at a school like --- No. 12 Old South Hall, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut. the city and state go away, but the No. 12 Old South Hall I'm not sure. I *think* it should go away...Naraht (talk) 18:01, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
I don't mind the clarification for a school name change, especially if it was obscure. Old records will occasionally pop up, showing Duke with another name (Trinity College until 1924), so even there, it's reasonable to note the clarification on Wikipedia lists. As to your second question, on specific building locations, where we have them it is reasonable to include this in body text in the history section, but not in the infobox. Jax MN (talk) 18:11, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
Sounds good, I like the Trinity College example. And if the school long since died with no wikipedia page, I'm leaving city and state. (Mu Phi Epsilon)Naraht (talk) 19:36, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
At this point, there is one infobox left with two links in the birthplace: [[Ohio State University]] [[Ohio State University Health Sciences Center for Global Health|College of Veterinary Medicine]], which I can live with.Naraht (talk) 22:26, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

former_affiliation3

Would like to add this parameter. Several of the former educational Sororities like Theta Sigma Upsilon which were in AES, PPA and NPC at various times prior to the merger. I figure that with three, it would look like "<former_affiliation>, <former_affiliation2> and <former_affiliation3>" but I don't know how to make that happen. Does that seem reasonable? (And Primefac, can that be done?Naraht (talk) 23:44, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Done. Tidied up the code a bit in the process to make it a bit easier to expand in the future if needed. Primefac (talk) 00:34, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Color box

Jax MN the Search [1] shows 7 infoboxes with colors and without color box. (tried the aliases on the template, but none there).Naraht (talk) 15:06, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

All seven have been updated. Thanks for noting this. Jax MN (talk) 19:12, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Scope

For Scope, my current understanding.

  1. ) Scope is defined by *current* size. National and then all but one chapter gone inactive = Local; International and having the one chapter overseas go inactive = National
  2. ) National should be accompanied by unlinked country in Parentheses. So. National (United States) and National (Philippines)
  3. ) North America would be appropriate if the chapters are in the United States and Canada
  4. ) Applies to chapters, *not* Alumni Associations (roughly defined as whether they can take in new members) So Alpha Phi Alpha would be International, Alpha Kappa Rho would be National (Philippines).
  5. ) Regional is definitely more than one chapter, but regional/(inter)national line is currently not defined. (I don't know what we would do if a fraternity had 5 chapters in Michigan and 5 in Ontario.)
We sometimes have indicated "(Formerly national)" if a group has fallen back to local status. Otherwise, your list is accurate. Jax MN (talk) 17:21, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
Which leads to the following situation, when a 50 chapter Honor Society goes down to 1 chapter, it is counted as local (formerly National), but if *that* chapter goes inactive, the infobox should change to National when the status becomes defunct... Not that I have a better solution...Naraht (talk) 19:38, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

VE format

In visual editor, the instructions for each field can be made visible. For example, when someone goes to add the founding date, they would see a prompt to use the date plus age template. This can be very helpful as most editors using VE are unlikely to hunt down Infobox fraternity's instructions. I am not sure what we would need to do to make our existing instructions visible. Look at Infobox university as an example, as prompts are visible with it. Rublamb (talk) 20:26, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

RublambThat is using the template data editor. For Infobox University, you can see what they have by using https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Infobox_university/doc&action=edit&templatedata=edit . For Infobox Fraternity you can use https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Infobox_fraternity/doc&action=edit&templatedata=edit . If you want to add for a specific entry click on it, if you want to resort, click on the three bars to the left of each entry and move it. It doesn't work well to try to move it more than a page at a time, so I'd move it up about 10 rows and then scroll. I'm heading to bed, but if you haven't completely redone things by morning, I'll get involved then. :)Naraht (talk) 03:04, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Additional Affiliations

For European groups, I think

are possibilities to add as abbreviations.

Other current affiliations that aren't really umbrellas in the way that I think that we expect are bed the linked ones.

Additional Affiliation

Parameter Bot

List for August is up at https://bambots.brucemyers.com/TemplateParam.php?wiki=enwiki&template=Infobox+fraternity . working on doing somewhat uncontroversial linking on Flower, Jewel and Tree. Naraht (talk) 13:59, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Standardization of Type

This is not intended to be nearly as strict as Status. I just thought I'd take a few well known examples and see if we can standardize on what should be in the field, I'm presuming two things 1) that unless something is *really* different, all get *some* sort of wikilink and 2) In all cases only the first word of a description is capitalized:

  • Phi Beta Kappa - Suggestion: [[Honor society]], other possibilities [[Honor society|Honor]], [[[[Honor society|Honorary]]
  • Alpha Tau Omega - Suggestion: [[List of social fraternities and sororities|Social]] here it is less of a question of what is displayed than what is linked. There really isn't a page directly on the topic
  • Alpha Kappa Psi - Suggestion: [[Professional fraternities and sororities|Professional]]
  • Korporatsioon Vironia - Suggestion: [[Studentenverbindung]] (Studentenverbindungen is plural, and we use singular for everything else)
  • Alpha Phi Omega - Suggestion:[[Service fraternities and sororities|Service]]
  • Book and Snake - Suggestion:Senior [[secret society]]
  • Order of Angell - Suggestion: Senior [[honor society]]
  • Euphemian Literary Society - Suggestion: [[Literary society|Literary]]
  • Order of Gimghoul - Suggestion:Not sure if it should be [[Secret society|Secret]] or [[Secret society]]

Naraht (talk) 13:59, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Membership

Given the number of non-collegiate groups (high school and community-based) and groups that have a mixture of collegiate and graduate chapters, I think we need to remove the automatic insertion of the word "collegiate" in the membership field. Rublamb (talk) 15:37, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Coat of Arms values

In general, which is preferred

  1. ) Starts with File:, Starts with Image:, Starts with nothing (these are interchangable?)
  2. ) is of type png, jpg, svg. (I know these aren't interchangable, at best we can figure out which to download from the fraternity website.

Naraht (talk) 17:29, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

PNG would be the perferred image type for the Internet. IDK if it matters regarding File or Image; although, WikiCommons uses File when you copy the photo code. Rublamb (talk) 19:20, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
SVG will be preferable if available, being a vector format that will render accurately at any size or resolution. If SVG is unavailable, PNG is the better fallback for something like a logo, which has a limited number of colors. JPG is a lossy format and really only suitable for photographs. - choster (talk) 21:57, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
@Choster: You are correct about vector files but it really depends on the image type (photo, digital logo, chart) and its size and source (scan, web grab, digital photo). Commons:File types has a good discussion on file types, concluding that there is no one best format for all image types. It indicates that SVG is only better for tables and flags and notes " SVG images on Wikipedia are not served to browsers. Instead, MediaWiki converts the SVG image to a PNG image and serves the PNG image." If I were creating a logo, SVG would be the ideal format. But, if I grab an image of a logo from the Internet, I would go with PNG because of color stability. For our usage, scalability is not a huge factor as most images we find are similar in size to our Infobox needs. And, I have always figured that I might as well use PNG so that what I see is what most people will get. Regardless, it makes sense to use Commons:File types to direct file type decisions on a case-by-case basis. Rublamb (talk) 00:12, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Website vs. Homepage

A few questions

  1. Is website preferred as a parameter value for a newly created page? Homepage seems to be alternate.
  2. Does it make a difference if the URL has additional directories to it? So use website if it is https://www.mumumu.net/ but use homepage if it is https://www.mumumu.net/index.shmtl or if it isn't even owned by the organization like https://www.ibex.edu/popcorn/mumumu/index.html?
  3. Should we avoid using official website if the site isn't owned by the organization like the ibex.edu above?

Naraht (talk) 21:08, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you're asking; we don't need to splitting hairs between what is the "website" and what is the "homepage". If the URL where 99% of people will land when looking up/at the GLO is where they end up, put it under the website parameter. Primefac (talk) 21:37, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

status = Merged and website/homepage

Sort of related to the website standardization, but making into its own topic Looking at Gamma Pi Epsilon sorority. It merged into Alpha Sigma Nu fraternity in 1973 (Both Jesuit specific). True merger, but to the ASN name. Based on that, I think that there should be no website in the infobox, and probably nothing in the external links. However, for Phi Alpha (fraternity), because there is a specific page about them at the Zeta Beta Tau website, external links can contain https://zbt.org/about-zbt/our-antecedent-groups/phi-alpha/ . Sound good?Naraht (talk) 10:55, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Sounds reasonable. Primefac (talk) 12:03, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
An external link makes sense, assuming it is not already a source for the article. Rublamb (talk) 13:34, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
That's something that I'm sort of hesitant about. Let's say that for Phi Alpha that we have a decent amount of information from Baird's and that the ZBT website page is used for the information (making something up here) that ties the date of inactivity for one chapter to December 1942 where Baird's only has 1942. Doesn't seem right to avoid having it in the external links... (or conversely realizing that the month is there causing it to be removed from External Links, especially if it is the only one.)Naraht (talk) 16:10, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

no use of lang|grc

As of now, there are a few pages where the page is named with Greek Letters that doesn't have the infobox with lang = {{lang|grc|...}}

  • Phi Gamma Delta - Comment text telling editors *not* to remove the letters in between
  • Kappa Delta Pi - I found *one* occurance of the Greek Letters on kdp.org (a person's profile) and a *few* otherwise, can probably stay with the latin.
  • Tri Kappa - They seem to actively discourage the use of three Kappas in a row, so I don't think changing to that makes sense.

I think those are OK. the rest I've changed... Naraht (talk) 20:44, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Standardization of website field

Presuming an apparently official domain, such as mumumu.org or trimu.org, the default unless other reasons should be similar to {{official website|http://www.sigmaphidelta.org}} and otherwise if not apparently official {{url|https://web.archive.org/web/20150506082109/http://uconntact.uconn.edu/organization/lambdalambdalambda|Tri Lambda website}}<nowiki>. I know that quite a few use the url to show only the domain such as <nowiki>{{URL|http://www.dke.org|dke.org}} , but that doesn't seem to fit what is appropriate.Naraht (talk) 13:59, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Only an official website should linked in the infobox. Unofficial sites can be included in External links, if included at all. I don't really care which template is used, but am fine with picking one. Assuming it is official website, it would be great to have the "official website template" show in VE when adding this field, giving all editors easy access to the prefered format. Rublamb (talk) 18:53, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
{{official}} should really only be used in the External links section, with {{URL}} used in an infobox (if only for formatting reasons). I don't necessarily think we need to mandate that it be used, though. Primefac (talk) 19:15, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
Don't we need to use some form of a tempatel so that there is not a bare URL? Rublamb (talk) 19:26, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
shrugs
If we want to format it a specific way, we can take the parameter {{website}} and then pass internally (i.e. in the template) into {{URL}}, allowing us to give a standard title param; we would probably need to add in a check logic to make sure {{URL}} isn't already being used in that parameter. Primefac (talk) 19:49, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
I'm fine with Primefac's idea and trust his ability to implement it.Naraht (talk) 22:56, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
So preferred (for now) is {{URL|https://www.mumumu.org/}}? And then after some template magic from Primefac (because nobody else out of this group knows how) , the preferred will be https://www.mumumu.org (oddly enough there is a dummy website at that address. )

Move official website

So if the infobox has an official website, we should both remove it from the infobox (and change to url) *and* move the {{Official website... to external links, right?Naraht (talk) 12:37, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Sounds right (I have not been moving {{Official website... to Extenal links but will start doing so. And again, only the organization's "offical" website should be in the infobox. Not its successor's webste, its Facebook page, a chapter's website, or other variations of this theme--I am fixing these as I come across them. I am still pondering if archived websites for defunct groups belong in the Infobox. Rublamb (talk) 14:09, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
My feeling on archived groups is that that it probably should be in external links. I also expect that in most cases, that an archived home page (or something on the site) is probably used *somewhere* as a reference.Naraht (talk) 15:17, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
I agree. Rublamb (talk) 15:26, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Remove/Keep Mission and Vision?

Mean as custard has in the last 24 hours deleted either Mission or Vision or both from the infobox template of three Fraternities (Alpha Zeta (professional)‎, Sigma Xi, and Alpha Kappa Psi). IMO, there are really two choices,

  1. Revert the changes and keep Mission and Vision in the templates
  2. Remove Mission and Vision as parameters.

The *Essay* Wikipedia:Avoid mission statements is probably useful. It is an essay and as such not official, but it does represent a fairly well organized set of arguments. I'd like to keep the discussion here, but will mention it over at the Wikiproject, just in case someone there *doesn't* have the template in their watchlist. (I'm not intending to indicate that Mean as custard has done wrong, but merely that I'm fine with jumping to Discuss rather than throwing in the Revert step. :) ) Naraht (talk) 15:13, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

Mission and vision statements are only valid if they are sufficiently unusual and encapsulate the organisation's function and aims in a way that cannot be better explained in any other form, or if they have been the subject of considerable third-party comment and so become notable in themselves. Virtually all of the time they are merely puffery and removing them improves the article. . . Mean as custard (talk) 15:57, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
I strongly support removing these parameters. It may sometimes be appropriate in the prose of an article but this information has no place in an infobox, a table that is intended to present readers with a concise, high-level overview of the subject of an article. ElKevbo (talk) 21:27, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
I sympathize somewhat. Dumb, wordy or ponderous mission or vision statements don't add much value for me, here nor in corporate management. Yet to label them such, these are all subjective opinions, except that one might quantify a number of words beyond which a statement ought to be considered 'wordy'. Sometimes groups appear to get excitable about formation steps, and go overboard, manufacturing a Mission, Vision statement, Pillars, Motto, yada-yada just because others have them. Perhaps it is easier to do this versus the hard work of recruitment and team-building.
Clearly, some mission and vision statements ARE instructive, pithy, and of significant importance to defining the nature of a group. Where then do we draw the line? Just having these parameters available will prompt many groups to fill them, sometimes extending an infobox for fifteen or twenty lines of text. To deny some is to allow a subjective judgement.
Maybe we set a Project standard to allow one such statement: Pick it, whether motto, pillars, mission statement or vision statement. Interested readers can always follow the link trail back to the GLO's own website, to read the detail. Jax MN (talk) 16:49, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Motto (and pillars) seems to fall into a different category to me from Mission/Vision Statements, whether or not they should. A 150 year old fraternity/sorority likely will have created a motto *at* the time of founding or soon after and changing that motto might require votes of multiple conventions due to a meaning explained in the ritual. A Mission Statement is likely to be something created by an employee of the National Office and simply need approval by the National Board.Naraht (talk) 17:07, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
This is a great discussion. I agree motto/pillars are different and do belong in the infobox, while mission statement should go. For one thing, the motto is usually short and can reasonably fit into an infobox slot, while a mission statement can take up an inch or more of vertical space. Some mission statements are several sentences or a short paragraph. They are just too long for the infobox. Another difference: mottos are often found in a secondary source such as Baird's, while mission statements almost exclusively come from the group's website or other publication. When included in the article, the mission statement rarely had a sourcee. We could remove them on that basis, without even getting into their generic/puffery nature. Rublamb (talk) 22:12, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
If the Mission/Vision Statements are the topic of news, then they belong in prose.Naraht (talk) 17:07, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
I agree with you, on including these when they are a topic of news. I also agree with ElKevbo on the matter of making infoboxes tight and summarial. This leads back to it being a subjective matter, resistive of making a hard-and-fast policy. Some years ago I had an exchange with MeanAsCustard, where I pushed back on what I thought was too-aggressive removal of text from GLO articles. I don't want to wholesale delete *all* these mission and vision statements (etc.), but I am sympathetic to the removal of unnecessary, non-encyclopedic text. This is a useful discussion, as we mull this over. Jax MN (talk) 18:29, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Jax MN I would have no problem with doing this in a manner that would allow you to see all of the deleted fields and determining which ones would make sense to add as prose. Naraht (talk) 16:03, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
Rublamb I understand a rule saying that Mission/Vision statements have to come from third party sources, but frankly that would almost always be equivalent to "if a third party has a reason to repeat it, it probably belongs in the text with the reason that they did so"

Restatement

This is *only* a proposal to remove the vision and mission fields. *No* change to motto or pillar fields.Naraht (talk) 16:03, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

At this point, there are not many with a mission statement and very few with a vision statement. I have looked at all of them. I don't think there is any added value to this content being in the infobox. My vote is to remove this content from the Infobox fraternity. Rublamb (talk) 22:49, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Yes, we now have a way to easily check the values in the fields we are deleting. Are we all agreed those fields should go?Naraht (talk) 01:50, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
@Naraht, the August report confirms the lack of data in the fields: Vision and Mission, so these can now be removed from the Infobox fraternity template. Because fields with the status of zero do not show up in the report, we will need to comfair July and August to see if there are any other that we successfully updated for deletion. Rublamb (talk) 19:07, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
Rublamb I don't think there is a good way to bring back July and August's information. Now and in the future we may want to copy the wikitext at the bottom onto pages in order to be able to compare. We could probably just compare August to the template itself and look for those that don't show up other than the "duplicates" like homepage.Naraht (talk) 21:44, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Standardization of State

I think we are sort of leaning toward [[Oregon|OR]] over [[Oregon]], so I'd like to standardize that way for State.Naraht (talk) 14:12, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

I finally checked MOS. MOS:STATEABBR says, with the exception of Washington, D.C., "abbreviations of place names—e.g., Calif. (California), TX (Texas), Yorks. (Yorkshire)—should not be used to stand for the full names in normal text.... They should not be used in infoboxes." So state names should always be spelled out in the body of the article and the infobox. However, MOS:STATEABBR does allow the use of linked state abbreviations where space is tight, such as in a table. Note that the abbreviations US or U.S. is allowed in the article text and Infobox as this is on the list of allowed acronyms found in MOS:ACRO. Rublamb (talk) 18:38, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
OK, so we flip the other way, and remove the state abbreviations then.Naraht (talk) 18:53, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
All state abbreviations done. The following piped entries remain. Washington, Georgia and New York need pipes on the right with their state name as the state name leads to redirect. Tau Delta Phi has DC on the right as that is an exception in MOS:STATEABBR.Naraht (talk) 19:41, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:Infobox_fraternity/Archive_2&oldid=1257766637"