Pi Kappa Phi was a Social sciences and society good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Pi Kappa Phi is part of the Fraternities and Sororities WikiProject, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Greek Life on the Wikipedia. This includes but is not limited to International social societies, local organizations, honor societies, and their members. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, visit the project page, where you can join the project, and/or contribute to the discussion.Fraternities and SororitiesWikipedia:WikiProject Fraternities and SororitiesTemplate:WikiProject Fraternities and SororitiesFraternities and Sororities articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Higher education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of higher education, universities, and colleges on Wikipedia. Please visit the project page to join the discussion, and see the project's article guideline for useful advice.Higher educationWikipedia:WikiProject Higher educationTemplate:WikiProject Higher educationHigher education articles
Article requests : Please review the history for further expansion. An interesting, free-source graphic might be added.
Cleanup : The list of "controversies", now re-labeled "Local chapter misconduct" is terribly long, and out of balance for what should be a summary article. It presently constitutes about half of the verbiage on the page. This is used as a euphemism for complaints by detractors around Wikipedia; sometimes these are valid court proceedings, sometimes the list becomes a catch-all for un-verifiable complaints that never result in discipline or closure. Because local "controversies" are just that, local, it is better I renamed the section and suggest that an editor move these individual citations of chapter-level issues into reference notes adjacent to those specific chapters (as pages for some other NIC fraternities have done) and there, include links or notes about bona fide closure reports as a reference off of a specific chapter. This is where the discussion should be hammered out, and a determination of what to include. My sense is, except where a situation is national news, like the Phi Kappa Psi / Rolling Stone false rape story fiasco, (to cite an example from another fraternity) or the cause of notable legislation about hazing or other national or regional stories, these smaller complaints aren't appropriate for a summary article about the national fraternity - they instead are local matters. What might have occurred at USC ought not be an indictment of a chapter at Miami of Ohio. --That wouldn't be fair at all. Instead, they should be reference notes adjacent to a particular chapter listing.
Wikify : This is a fairly short, but good article. See the template on the Fraternities and Sororities Project page. The chapter list is nicely done. You could add notes about where each chapter came from, either a predecessor group or a colony. Indicate if a chapter is active by bolding its name, or if inactive by using italics. A table will allow room where chapter references may point to portal pages, and allow comments on where a chapter came from, interesting facts or its outcome. A table may also be used to showcase notable members, but be sure to add Inclusion Rules to avoid vanity listings.
Wokebreaker2017, I sympathize over your recent edits, seeking to remove detail about several campus disciplinary actions or closures. The Project group that monitors GLO pages has standardized our treatment of these items on "national" pages by forcing these specific points under a subtitle "Local chapter or member misconduct", and we require solid citations. Previous to our standardization efforts it had been common to list these as "Controversies"; but in all cases I know if, these have never been systemic in nature, and are, rather, local. When these pop up, here and for other GLOs, any negative barking without citation is removed. But Wikipedia is a neutral encyclopedia, so we cannot simply hide inconvenient facts. We remain neutral wherever possible.
After about a decade has passed since a hazing injury, alcohol disciplinary action or cited negative story, unless these have significant and persistent national news notoriety, we 'demote' the negative story into a reference item placed against that chapter's line in the fraternity's chapter list. My rationale for this is that the 'offenders' are thus long gone from the chapter, and it is likely that two or three generations of members have came and went via graduation: that chapter thus is a new organization, and it is not fair to label those actives as offenders. We are also vigilant to ensure that negative information does not declare the entire national to be bad; these are not "systemic" problems that affect the entire national. Rather, they are instances of errors at the local or individual level. Jax MN (talk) 17:32, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
