User talk:Ajsune

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Kansas State Greek Life nomenclature[edit]

In regards to Kansas State Greeks.

  1. There is no reason to delink the organizations, any reference to Tau Kappa Epsilon (for example) except those in a reference or which have already been referenced earlier in the page should be linked to the Tau Kappa Epsilon Page (and no way in which Delta Sigma Phi is unique in that regard)
  2. Incorporated. All of the National Fraternities and Sororities at Kansas State are Incorporated. The NPHC groups just tend to have members who use it in that way. Describing a group as Incorporated should only really be done in situations specifically about their organizations. Similarly, Wikipedia would never describe someone as working for Exxon-Mobil Incorporated.
  3. Fraternity vs. Sorority, the groups are described by the heading above. It *may* be appropriate to note with a † those sororities which are actually women's fraternities, but that isn't often done.

Please compare the setup for Fraternities/Sororities with similar institutions (Fellow Big 12 institutions for example). (added) Also, what specific organization did you mean "out of respect for".Naraht (talk) 15:30, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

I see that you're willing to edit war over this but please be aware that such activities will likely result in a block. In addition to Naraht's message above, we've also opened a section in the article's Talk page. Please join the discussion. ElKevbo (talk) 16:01, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Let me be clear that this is not a war. While I understand that Wikipedia has certain suggested standards, those original standards did not take into consideration the complexities of nomenclature of organizations with varying naming characteristics. If it is the case of alignment and neatness for readers and systems then I understand the information systems aspect of the guidelines. My intent is not to create a back-and-forth, rather I'm simply challenging the process. In response to the comments above,

  1. I'm not sure why Tau Kappa Epsilon or any other organization is being delinked. It is my intention to link all of the organizations to their respective pages.
  2. You're correct in stating that most fraternal organizations are incorporated, just for the simple fact and ability to do business across state lines. While the majority of the North-American Interfraternity Conference and National Panhellenic Conference organizations do not outwardly write Inc, many of the culturally-based fraternal organizations do. While this may not align with Wikipedia standards, it is an example of how culture is not considered in the guidelines. Their purpose for stating and writing "Inc." after their full name is out of pride. As you can imagine, these organizations founded under hard times of oppression were made up of American citizens who at the time were not allowed to own a business, much less have a voice in society. Therefore, their desire to list Inc. in their name in everything that is written is out of pride.
  3. Regarding the Fraternity vs. Sorority, the reason for listing whether they are a fraternity, sorority, women's fraternity or fraternity for women is for the simple education of the reader. Isn't this the purpose of Wikipedia? Perhaps the standards for fraternal organizations should change to accommodate their uniqueness in names. And with all do respect, your example of Exxon-Mobil, Inc. is not valid. We're talking about a corporation vs. a private non-for-profit organization founded on principles and values. Ajsune (talk) 09:32, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
  1. Because you are complete reverting all changes that are made, including those linking fraternities and sororities like Tau Kappa Epsilon to their pages.
  2. And this *is* noted on the particular pages. It is appropriate to do note this on the individual pages for Alpha Phi Alpha (for example), but not on the pages for each and every school that has it there. And the pride of an organization is *not* something to be taken into account when doing a page. Remember *Neutral* Point of View.
  3. Similarly. Sorority is generally accepted as the term for all of the members of the NPC whether or not they are women's fraternities internally.Naraht (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

One question, what credentials do you have to be speaking on behalf of NIC, NPHC, NPC, NMGC, NAPA and other social fraternal organizations? Just curious. Pride as you mentioned above, in the case of our cultural social-service fraternal organizations, is not neutral when the author makes a determination on the name of the organization. Perhaps you should ask the organization what "neutral" point-of-view/perspective that they would like displayed to the world about their organizations. Ajsune (talk) 18:13, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm not speaking on behalf of any of the Greek Organizations, I'm speaking on behalf on the rules of Wikipedia. And it isn't relevant by Wikipedia rules what they want themselves to be called. It *is* relevant what they are commonly called in secondary sources like newspapers, books and magazines. The opinions of the National President of Tau Kappa Epsilon has no more relevance to what should in the Tau Kappa Epsilon article (and what the article should be called) than any other editor. Please see WP:OWN in that regard. (Though it is likely that the National president of TKE would have access to written sources that many would not). Also please read WP:NPOV in terms of what a Neutral Point of View is in regards to Wikipedia.
And I have dealt with this many times over the years in regards to my own Greek Letter Organization. As much as I have pride in that organization, I recognize that any article or mention of it *must* fit NPOV.Naraht (talk) 23:39, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Could we please move this discussion back over to Talk:Kansas State University where other interested editors can see it and participate? ElKevbo (talk) 15:51, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Note made there summarizing discussion here.Naraht (talk) 16:25, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

List of Delta Sigma Phi chapters[edit]

Two quick suggestions in regards to the List of Delta Sigma Phi chapters article. First, is there someplace that the Gordian Knot from which the chapter number come from can be defined. Secondly, while not in the reference, would it be correct to describe Alpha chapter, although inactive, as part of the Northeast Region?Naraht (talk) 16:18, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Responding to your questions,

  1. The Gordian Knot has the chapters listed in their chartering order, yet does not specifically have a numerical number written by it. Since the national fraternity headquarters publishes the book, they have always listed the chapters in chartering order. It is worth noting that the numerical order of the organizations does not align with the year or sequential Greek-letter of the chapters. Why this is the case, many are not sure. Perhaps the organizations were colonized at different times and then chartered in a different order than they were colonized. The succession order of chapters list is the same per the roll call of chapters during national events.
  2. So, the regions listing is out-dated. I created the comprehensive list to incorporate our dormant chapters. I am not even sure that the region-system is still used. Rather than delete the listings above, I kept the information the same as what was there previously. It is my intent to visit with my headquarters staff and see whether or not they are still using this system. If this is not the case, then I will end up deleting the region sections listed above.

Ajsune (talk) 09:40, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

  1. Hmm. This fact is probably appropriate as a note on the page.
  2. The following page: http://www.deltasig.org/connect/uac on the Delta Sigma Phi website uses those terms, so I'm pretty sure it is still used.Naraht (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

As a member of this national organization, I can tell you with certainty that this page is out-dated - see the following phrase on the page - Members of the UAC for the 2010-11 academic year. The page cannot be accessed without using the direct link. Currently, the national organization is undergoing some reorganization. When all is complete, a new or revised region system will be implemented. From there, I will correct it. Ajsune (talk) 18:19, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Regions also exist as reachable from the main page by clicking locations, the results are grouped by regions. But if the Region system is being redone, then waiting is fine.Naraht (talk) 16:24, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 29[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Delta Sigma Phi chapters, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Washington and Georgia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:23, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:51, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Ajsune. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)