Talk:Phi Alpha Literary Society

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Paul Findley a great man?[edit]

Paul Findley is a controversial figure. For what reason should Wikipedia forsake a NPOV and refer to him as a great man? Precis 08:35, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

While I personally regard him as a great man, I realize that the word "great" might not show neutrality. However, I think that the deletion of the whole sentence and the one following is unnecessary. I think that replacing "great" with the word "successful" is a better solution. --GianniM 20:40, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, "successful" is a relatively neutral term, but "excellence" is not. Encyclopedic information is not supposed to be based on impression or guesswork. If you know for a fact that there are "many", provide the source. Until the statements are both justified and written from a NPOV, they should be removed. Precis 08:18, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia user John Milito conflict of interest edits?[edit]

I don't want to point fingers but I find it strange that user John Milito removed information that he did not agree with on the Illinois College page just because he felt it was "out of place". I assumed good faith until I did a Google search of the name. With a Google search I discovered that a man by the name of John Milito is a member of Phi Alpha literary society at Illinois College. See http://phi-alpha.blogspot.com/ . According to the Illinois College website John Milito graduated in 2006. Considering the numerous edits of the Phi Alpha article on Wikipedia by a user using John Milito as a name, with links on his user page that go to a blog maintained by Phi Alpha's John Milito, the edits on this page and the Illinois College page could be a conflict of interest. The Illinois College article is not to be 'guarded' by college or society 'gatekeepers' and I strongly question if it is acceptable for a member of a college society to make edits on a Wikipedia article about that society.SunRiddled (talk) 19:26, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That looks like the beginning of a pretty solid Wikipedia page about me. I've done quite a bit of research on the society and Illinois College as a whole, and I have done my best to properly cite what I write. If you find anything in your own research that doesn't agree, definitely let me know. I hope you would agree that on a list of notable alumni including governors, senators, and presidential candidates, "Senior Editor for a popular artist social networking site" is most definitely "out of place". Nothing personal. John Milito (talk) 22:29, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
John, what annoys me is the constant acts of unchecked vandalism on the Illinois College article. It is even more annoying when it takes little digging to find out that one of the editors doing it is directly involved with the college and society that he keeps making edits on! Last I checked that is a conflict of interest. I always assume good faith but this is ridiculous. If a member of a company can't make edits on an article about the company I fail to see why it should be accepted that a society alum can make edits on an article about his society. The Illinois College article is a different topic altogether. Sherwin is not the first non-historic person to be removed from the alumni section even though Wikipedia consensus has been that he is notable by the standards of this community. I do find it strange that most of the alumni mentioned are past members of Phi Alpha or have some other kind of connection to the society. Are you telling me that Illinois College has only had successful alums from that society? If you don't agree that Sherwin is notable I strongly urge you to open a deletion debate instead of going against consensus. I've added several art writers to the alumni sections of the colleges they attended and this is the first edit that has been removed and from what I've seen it is not the first time he has been removed. That is why I mentioned gatekeeping because it honestly looks like that is what is going on.SunRiddled (talk) 05:32, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I want to point out that I did not violate your privacy. You made that information available by posting a link to your blog on your user page and using your legal name for your handle. I've taken screenshots of everything if for some reason I have to prove that I did not violate privacy terms. Your intentions might be good but you really need to read up on consensus and conflict of interest unless you want people to assume that you are not acting in good faith.SunRiddled (talk) 05:49, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Member of Phi Alpha[edit]

I am a member of Phi Alpha Literary Society. I have done extensive research on the subject and have added a large body of thoroughly cited information to the society's page. Please let me know if you find anything here that is incorrect. Thank you. John Milito (talk) 20:14, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

John so good of you to finally reveal your identity after having been involved in several deletion debates of articles about fellow members of your society and after making more than 250+ (I stopped counting) edits of Phi Alpha and articles about people associated with Phi Alpha since 2008. Including removal of controversial information about those individuals from what I observed. Strange that you only reveal your connection after being exposed. I’m going to share some info from Wikipedia’s rules on conflict of interest afterwards I will try to contact an admin. “A Wikipedia conflict of interest (COI) is an incompatibility between the aim of Wikipedia, which is to produce a neutral, reliably sourced encyclopedia, and the aims of an individual editor. COI editing involves contributing to Wikipedia in order to promote your own interests or those of other individuals, companies, or groups. Where advancing outside interests is more important to an editor than advancing the aims of Wikipedia, that editor stands in a conflict of interest.” and “COI editing also risks causing public embarrassment for the individuals and groups being promoted.” and as for your claim that I violated your privacy, “Posting another editor's personal information is harassment, unless that person voluntarily had posted his or her own information, or links to such information, on Wikipedia.”. You did, and at the rate you are going both you and your society will have to live with your unethical choices. I'll see if I can get an admin to look over this.SunRiddled (talk) 21:49, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I've been hiding my identity behind my actual name for too long. Your super sleuthing has finally brought me to justice. Be specific about which edits of mine you disagree with. Where is the "removal of controversial information"? When did I ever claim you violated my privacy? Now you're just making things up. John Milito (talk) 09:01, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You are right. Before you were hiding your identity with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/GianniM until you lost the password. You admit to having used that account on your current user page. Remember that anything you provide on your user page or elsewhere on Wikipedia is not a violation of your privacy if someone asks about it or points out a COI situation. I don't believe you were ignorant of Wikipedia's policies for just over 5 years. I feel confident in saying that. It is that kind of behavior that frustrates people about Wikipedia.

I just want you to understand that single purpose accounts and constant editing of articles that you have a direct and professional connection to is not what Wikipedia is about. Your intentions may be good but there are instances where your arguments are not neutral because of your affiliation with the society. Look at some of the words you have used in the past to describe Phi Alpha alum and tell me you were being neutral. An interest in Phi Alpha is one thing. A personal relationship with Phi Alpha and a clear desire to promote it is another. You have a professional and interpersonal interest in Phi Alpha.SunRiddled (talk) 08:19, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh. OK you've made your point. I'd like to say that I actually have been ignorant of all of this COI business this whole time. I would like to think it is because I make edits that are even handed and I do my best to properly cite what I write, and no one has mentioned it before. Your charming rants have educated me about it though, and that's why I updated my talk page. John Milito (talk) 15:25, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Phi Alpha Literary Society punished for hazing in 2012[edit]

The IC societies were rocked this year by a hazing scandal. Pledging was shut down for all societies by the college during an investigation. It was reported about in the Jacksonville Journal Courier. Now one of the societies, Phi Alpha, has received disciplinary punishment from the college.The other societies have not been punished. Why isn’t there anything about that here?Proudtobered (talk) 18:44, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Phi Alpha Literary Society. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

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

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 23:17, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

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

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:45, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

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

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:32, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Phi_Alpha_Literary_Society&oldid=1204609219"