User talk:Umstadter

Welcome!

Hello, Umstadter, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Hiberniantears (talk) 21:00, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Beta Theta Pi

Hi Umstadter. I see you are new to Wikipedia. Welcome! I saw your message at WP:AIV about a page protection. However, that is actually not the place to do those requests. You may be looking for WP:RFPP. Happy editing! :) Versus22_talk 21:06, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 21:58, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Beta Theta Pi

Hello. My talk page has been locked from new users because of vandalism and harrasment directed towards me recently because of vandals. I apologize for that inconvenience. I know that you are new to Wikipedia and as such you should familiarize yourself with the copyright laws. I'm glad to see that you sent an e-mail to the appropriate parties regarding text for Beta Theta Pi and hopefully this can be resolved. A couple of things to keep in mind and a couple of thoughts. First, no one owns any article on Wikipedia. You nor anybody else owns the Beta Theta Pi article and it is not your "job to maintain" the article. Please refer to Wikipedia's Policy on ownership of articles. Second, I am fully aware that Wikipedia is a tremendous source of information and it is often times the first web page that comes up in a web search and as such many people who have a connection with a topic feel inclined to include information. However, all that information must be neutral and verifiable. Concerning articles of fraternities and sororities, they should never be used as a recruitment tool. There are several articles that have criticism directed toward the fraternity but they remain because they are verified. Neutrality in Wikipedia is paramount. I have seen on occasion members of fraternity staff exclude verifiable information because it makes their organization look bad. It's one thing to keep in mind. Personally, I feel that any fraternity staff are more than welcome to contribute but they should really keep in mind that the Wikipedia article on their fraternity should never be looked at as an extension of their fraternity's website. There is no fraternity article on Wikipedia whose contents was just a copy and paste from their actual fraternity website. Many people have spent a lot of time re-writing the contents in their own words. It shows someone actually took time in helping to shape and form the article so others can add on to it later. Having a "standard" history limits that. Again, that's just my opinion based on what I've seen. Lastly, again I know that you are new, but please be very careful in who you label as a "vandal". I take the removal of vandalism on Wikipedia seriously. I spent a lot of my time removing vandalism and information which may be deemed as libel. I've done it here for years. Me and many others like me pay close attention to the fraternity and sorority articles here on Wikipedia in particular because they are among the most vandalized pages here for obvious reasons. I have on many occasion removed many things from the Beta Theta Pi article including secrets which should not have been made public. The Beta Theta Pi article had a history of people posting copyrighted material on it before which is why I did not hestitate in undoing your edit. In accordance with Wikipedia policy, I was correct in removing that text you placed and I actually still have a right to remove it until you get permission from Wikimedia. However, I will refrain in doing so for the time being, although others are free to do so. In the future, please assume good faith and don't be quick in assuming people's intentions. ----Ðysepsion † ^{Speak your mind} 22:56, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Echoing what was said above by Ðysepsion, please refrain from re-adding this material until all copyright issues are resolved. Thanks!Justinm1978 (talk) 00:58, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Per above, do not add this material until someone from WP:OTRS reads your email and confirms on the article talk page that you are the copyright owner. Your statement that "I am the copyright owner" is not sufficient to cover legal issues resulting from copyright infringement (especially as the website very clearly states that the material is copyrighted with all rights reserved), and you must confirm to Wikipedia that you are the copyright owner before posting copyrighted material. Note that the material will have to be substantially re-written because the tone unsuitable for an encyclopedia article. Furthermore, see Wikipedia:Vandalism for what we class as vandalism, and Wikipedia:Page protection for the policy on when pages are protected - enforcing policy is definitely not vandalism and we definitely don't protect pages because of it. Hut 8.5 07:40, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Dysepsion for your response. Not understanding the whole Wikipedia hierarchy I was under the assumption that you were a vandal based on what appeared to be an unwarranted deletion of content. Additionally your online name gave me a bit of a concern.

There are few things I'd like to clear up. I understand that no one owns Wikipedia or the articles contained therein. However, since I've developed the organization's website and other online resources like our Facebook Fans page, blog, YouTube channel, Linkedin Group, etc., I felt that it was incumbent upon me to update the Beta Theta Pi Wikipedia page. I am not claiming ownership of the Wiki page as I fully understand that people can add/post verifiable articles on the page as they see fit.

I'd also like to mention that the content that's on our national website is the same content that came from a published work called "Son of the Stars." All of which, we have the legal rights to distribute and I can provide you or Wikipedia with a copy of the book for verification purposes.

On the issue of using Wikipedia as a "recruitment tool," I didn't get the sense that the content posted was being used in that manner - it was certainly not my intent. As far as I know, the content focused primarily on the history of Beta Theta Pi.

While I understand that having a "standard history" can be limiting, my contention is that once this information is posted to Wikipedia, then that will provide a forum for people to contribute or dispute certain inaccuracies within an article (for good or for bad) - I mean, isn't that the whole idea behind Wikipedia? Besides, why should I rewrite the history of our organization, when someone has already done it better (and we have the legal copyrights to re-publish it online).

As for using Wikipedia as an extension of our website - I've never considered it as such. In my mind, a Wiki is a standalone page that provides content from a variety of sources.

Finally, I'd like to thank you for deleting content that is deemed to be Beta Theta Pi secrets. Having read a few rituals from other organizations, including the three acts of the Phi Delta Theta initiation ceremony, I think it's going to be increasingly harder to keep our secrets, secret for much longer. Perhaps it'll be a blessing in disguise. I mean if our values were to be made public, then people would actually start holding us accountable to them. Unfortunately, I think many of our members aren't quite there yet and as such we must remain vigilant against having that information posted on the web.

Thank you again for your feedback.

Umstadter (talk) 17:22, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your response and understanding. I personally would like to see the Beta Theta Pi article grow. It is the only one of the Miami Triad fraternity articles that is bare. Hut 8.5 did make a very good point in that regardless of whether or not you own the text of the history, it must be written in an encyclopedic tone. It should not try to "elevate" or "praise" the fraternity so to speak. As you will find out, there are many people here on Wikipedia or who come here who are just plain anti-fraternity and they will not hestitate to tag the article as being not neutral. That's why in the past many editors just re-write the history to avoid confrontation or seek compromise. There's always going to be a bias for or against any topic here on Wikipedia.

As far as secrets go, yes it is a very big concern especially after a certain website (which I am sure you are aware) has leaked the ritual of several Greek organizations. However, the biggest concern for me are the unwritten secrets passed down verbally, e.g. the meaning of the letters, passwords, handshakes etc. These account for nearly all the secrets posted here on Wikipedia. They are removed almost immediately but as you can imagine we can't all be here 24 hours a day. I'm concerned not only for each organization but for Wikipedia as well because of any legal action that may be directed toward it by any fraternity or sorority.

Yes, I do have an unusual screen name, but I'd like to keep my identity a secret. On occasion I have even warned what I assumed to be someone from the staff of Phi Delta Theta not to remove any criticism regarding the fraternity's Alchohol Free Housing Policy. Anyway, welcome to Wikipedia, and I hope you can continue to learn about the project and contribute. ----Ðysepsion † ^{Speak your mind} 18:14, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Our project

Good afternoon Umstadter. I noted you are a member of the Fraternities and Sororities Project. Thanks for that.

We welcome your participation.

For many of us, these institutions represent a very impactful period in our lives. I know of several chapter advisors among the regular 300 participants, along with general alumni and undergrads that are Wiki-savvy. We presently keep an eye on 1,500 or so Greek pages, while a fairly substantial number of recent or dormant local chapters don't make the cut. There are perhaps 6,000 locals that do not have a Wikipedia article, and maybe 50 that do - mostly at Ivy League schools. Long ago, the Baird's Manual editors decided to include as national groups those societies that had three or more chapters, or locals that met a certain bar of longevity: ten years or more. We follow that same logic.

The Project page lists several items on our To Do list, but among them are:

Review any of our watched pages for vandalism.
Update chapter information for the many lists of chapters.
Write an article to list the Greeks on a particular campus. 50 of these have been done, so far.
Research a new article for a page that is missing. On our watchlist, these show up as red links.
Vote on whether to keep a contested page or not.

There is a debate among editors on Wikipedia about whether to aggressively delete articles or allow their inclusion, based on a notoriously fickle determination of NOTIBILITY. Once an article is factually and cleanly written, I personally favor Inclusion, in order to make life easier for future researchers. Especially for fraternity, sorority and collegiate society articles.

If this last issue is of interest, you may wish to weigh in on a recent discussion of an "Article for Deletion" or AfD: Two or three of these crop up each month. One we are currently discussing is Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Delta Beta Phi. Voting is simple, and the instructions are at the top. Just add a line, with your vote, to Keep or Delete (or some other option) bolded at the start of the line.

Whatever you choose to do, we welcome your participation in this Greek-friendly project. Jax MN (talk) 23:33, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fraternity articles for deletion

You may not have seen these. There are current Article for Deletion (AfD) debate on two Project articles. You may be interested in weighing in, whether to delete or not. Voting requires the addition of a "Keep" or "Delete" option as a new bullet at the bottom of each discussion. There are a couple of other technical types of votes. Jax MN (talk) 23:30, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Fraternities and sororities