Open main menu
WikiProject Fraternities and Sororities (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
Fraternities and sororities 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Universities (Rated B-class)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Universities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of universities and colleges on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.

HISTORY INFORMATIONEdit

Hazing issue and modern porn websitesEdit

I have become concerned about the growing number of websites that depict hazing in a more and more dramatic way. Specifically I'm referring to sights like hazehim.com where pledges supposedly are forced to do sex acts with brothers. I thinking there most be many students and parents out their thinking this stuff is real..since they claim it is "real". I prepared the following lines to be inserted in the paragraph hazing. I will let someone else elect whether to add them or not.

Proposed lines: This said, the degree and extent that hazing still exists is far from the fantasy world of pornography. Many videos now flood the internet with staged scenes and paid actors claiming to demonstrate "real" college life events. Some prospective students may be intimidated from joining a Fraternity or Sorority as a result of these web-sites that are largely described as being a "scam". [1]

Philip Maise, former President Theta Xi, member Delta Lambda Phi — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pbmaise (talkcontribs) 07:32, 28 August 2011 (UTC)


A new section was created about Anti-Hazing to avoid systemic biases and give other sides of fraternity and sorority life. RossAGoldberg1 (talk) 21:04, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

First Cultural FraternitiesEdit

Looking at the correction for the claims in Line 122 for the first cultural fraternities, I ask if they are limited to active fraternities and limited to the continental USA?

I think that the line should be amended with a language such as "active groups in the continental USA." --Coquidragon (talk) 14:08, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

CitationsEdit

There are citations to books in the article that aren't listed at the bottom. It would seem sensible to make a consistent style of citation (using ref tags preferably, and citing page as well as book) and try to rescue the missing cites. Stifle (talk) 08:43, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Philanthropy examplesEdit

I think that we should remove the examples. It is turning into a pointless laundry list because everyone wants to see their organization listed. NYCRuss 17:39, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

I agree. It looks terrible and ridiculous; all the Philanthropy should be listed on the organization's personal page -Dam1en

Appropriate photos for this articleEdit

It seems to me to be highly inappropriate to use this page to promote a single chapter, as was done yesterday with the Bowling Green State KAs. I believe that an attempt should be made to either show more inclusive photos, or to at least display photos without giant banners that shout the organization's name. NYCRuss 06:34, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't see the KA pictures as promotion any more than any of the other pictures on the page (alpha kappa alpha, alpha xi delta), nor greek organization cited in the body. The opening picture is of Tau Kappa Epsilon and Kappa Alpha, I would call that a picture promoting greek unity rather than promoting a single chapter. The lower picture goes with a philanthropic event. Others are free to post pictures of their own. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brewski919 (talkcontribs) 06:41, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
I agree that it doesn't fit and should clearly be taken down.
The Alpha Xi picture doesn't even make it clear what organization it is, as it simply is reinforcing the article. The AKA pledge pin is also reinforcing the article. Neither of the photos that you posted are able to relate to the article without captions, and both unnecessarily are dominated by the letters of one or two organizations. Posting two pictures that feature one chapter on this page is clearly WP:PROMOTION. NYCRuss 06:51, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps finding some images of extremely prototypical chapter houses and commenting on common architectures found in greek housing is appropriate.

Gay/lesbian issues within frats?Edit

We should work gay and lesbian attitudes towards fraternities & sororities as well as Greek attitudes towards gays and lesbians into this article. This link has some potentially useful information. What do you guys think? --- cymru lass (hit me up)(background check) 21:31, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure if there general shared opinion on fraternities and sororities by the GLBT community. Maybe something about GLBT specific Greek organizations but I'm not familiar with those. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brewski919 (talkcontribs) 06:48, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Popular CultureEdit

Should "American Pie: The Naked Mile" not be mentioned here? It's part of a series of films that are engrained in the younger generation and focusses substantially on rivalry between fraternities. JonD93 (talk) 22:40, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Well the pop culture section of this article is a bit barren compared to the amount of greek themed entertainment there has been over the years. I think the films mentioned are very notable in how they showed greek life and are major motion picture releases. The naked mile and beta house(which lets face it was terrible) were straight to DVD sequels and will be less notable throughout the years. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brewski919 (talkcontribs) 11:53, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

I thought this was an interesting quoteEdit

I just added the following to the Fraternities and sororities#Rituals and symbols section, based on this ref (with a little help from this other ref):

For example, writer Julian Hawthorne, the son of Nathaniel Hawthorne, wrote (in his posthumously published Memoirs) of an ironic coincidence surrounding his fraternal initiation:

I was initiated into a college secret society—a couple of hours of grotesque and good-humored rodomontade and horseplay, in which I cooperated as in a kind of pleasant nightmare, confident, even when branded with a red-hot iron or doused head-over heels in boiling oil, that it would come out all right. The neophyte is effectively blindfolded during the proceedings, and at last, still sightless, I was led down flights of steps into a silent crypt, and helped into a coffin, where I was to stay until the Resurrection...Thus it was that just as my father passed from this earth, I was lying in a coffin during my initiation into Delta Kappa Epsilon.

As I noted in an embedded comment, I used the possibly clumsy approach of embedding an extra ref within the blockquote in order to include the following context that I thought important to include: "This was, of course, all very collegiate for that long-ago time, and—with the exception of the 'red-hot iron' and 'boiling oil' references, if taken too literally—quite typical."

Anyone know of a better way to do this? I realize I could have been more wordy and put the context into the body of the article itself, but I was hoping for some other alternative. Thanks 67.101.7.123 (talk) 21:31, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

What is the general public opinion towards those questionable organizations?Edit

I live in a country where there are no such things as fraternities or sororities, so I was wondering what is the general public opinion towards them. Is it positive or negative, because the article didn't really say. For me personally it looks simply like a legitimate way for some kids to establish their superiority to the others, which I think is a very disturbing thing. The fact that universities approve the existence of organizations, based on the social status of their students is even more disturbing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.43.30.53 (talk) 14:48, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Who said anything about superiority? They are mainly just social groups. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.164.129.202 (talk) 04:22, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

That's about right. There is certainly a class issue involved. People outside of these organizations often see them just as you've suggested. The people invovled often have very hard times dealing with any sort of criticism of them though. It has an air of cultishness to it.

It honestly depends on different factors. For instance, fraternities and sororities may be social, professional, honorary or service. Also, different schools may promote different Greek environments. GlaciesofPacis (talk) 16:30, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Studying baptismEdit

First, excuse me for my bad english. My question is : is the USA fraternities are equivalent to our "studying baptism", here in Belgium. The common point may be:

- Lots of alcohol
- Hazing (endurance test, psychological and physical tiredness)
- Secret, closed group
- Reconnaissance signs

Jeanterre —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.247.178.112 (talk) 20:38, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

To all the points, it really depends. For instance, there are many dry (no alcohol) organizations, particularly among non-social fraternities and sororities. As for the point about a secret, closed group, the Delta Upsilon fraternity is completely open. Their ritual book is online, which they say is to promote the feelings of non-secrecy. Hazing, there are certainly instances of hazing (many more than are reported), but most campuses have zero-tolerance approaches to hazing, meaning that if an organization is found to have hazed someone, they may be suspended or may have their charter revoked. I'm afraid I don't know what reconnaissance signs are, could you enlighten me please? GlaciesofPacis (talk) 16:42, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

First SororityEdit

On the page the first sorority is said to be Kappa Alpha Theta [2] , but on this page it states it was established in 1870. Alpha Delta Pi [3] on the other hand is said to be established in 1851. There seems to be a contradiction to what sorority was established first. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iamabigboy360 (talkcontribs) 22:38, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Good catch. Even this GDI knows that ADPi was the first sorority. ElKevbo (talk) 23:32, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

First Non-denominational SororityEdit

On the page about soroities it is said that "In 1913, at Hunter College, New York, Phi Sigma Sigma became the first non-denominational sorority, allowing any woman, regardless of race, religion, or economic background into membership.[citation needed]" This is true and a citation should be added as [4] Skyesong (talk) 14:58, June 26, 2011‎

Initials must be entirely uniqueEdit

I could track this down later, but I'm pretty sure (and the Article doesn't mention this yet) that the initials must be completely unique even across different types of organizations. Consider Beta Beta Beta Biology Honor Society, of which I happen to be a member. I'm pretty sure that not even a social organization (let alone another honor society) can be founded with the exact same initials. The same would work in reverse (a newly founded honor society can't reuse a social frat's initials either). (This would go without saying within each type of organization.) Can anyone perhaps suggest where sources on this may be located? Don't get me wrong: I'll also look. I'll see if I can work this into the Article if true. The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 23:38, October 1, 2011

My experience is that this happens all the time. From a practical standpoint, few founding members have the wherewithal to do an exhaustive search of all the names of the national and local societies out there. Baird's is an incomplete reference, and so is Wikipedia. Many of the resulting locals that chose an already-used name will die out. Established fraternities and sororities commonly exercise their trademark rights to protect logos or will protect their names in certain font and color arrangements, while it is less likely that they can require a cease and desist order on the Greek names themselves. But a new local chapter may have difficulty filing a name with their secretary of state if it conflicts. I'll give you an example. There is a small national fraternity called Phi Sigma Phi, with ten chapters, Hartwick College has a local sorority which picked the same name. I don't know its age, but suspect it is fairly recent.[5] But to your point, there are 'clean' corporate names and there are those that are otherwise, and when it gets to the point of difficulty, some of these fight it out in the courts. Jax MN (talk) 16:01, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Akapledgepin.jpg Nominated for DeletionEdit

  An image used in this article, File:Akapledgepin.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests December 2011
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 11:59, December 23, 2011‎

HazingEdit

An editor, User:Bali88, recently added links to hazing deaths and expanded language about this scourge. I don't want to minimize it because it still plagues chapters across the country and requires constant vigilance. Still, hazing appears to me to be one of those subjects that gets whipped up by the media and by campus officials into a frenzy, regardless of whether the incident itself is that severe. --A midnight recitation of the names of the founders should not be given the same punishment as a pledge death. Greek leaders know that small misguided traditions can quickly lead to large ones, so they responsibly nip things in the bud. It therefore becomes an opportunity to teach, and a witch hunt is an overreaction.

Thankfully, severe hazing events are still so rare that a single event is picked up as national news, and repeat events may not happen elsewhere for months or years.

I edited the main page dialog to reference the many other places where hazing occurs, and to note that national fraternities and sororities work hard to stamp it out. I think my language is more fairly weighted.

Bali88 has spent considerable time researching matters of criminality, including hazing. So I think his/her edits are in good faith. He/she recently added a template link to one of the national fraternities citing a hazing death in 1894. While tragic, this event is so far disassociated from us today that the perpetrators grandchildren are by now old men themselves. Recent examples are far more relevant, and hence, I think these references should be cut off at some point as not meeting the bar of trivial linkage - even though no death is ever trivial. Maybe we can agree to retain mention of these events, if they occur and are wp:notable, at 20 years or less? Jax MN (talk) 16:20, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

I do have an interest in crime articles and have written a significant number of them, but I also have done a lot of work improving articles regarding fraternities and sororities and have substantially rewritten at least a couple of them. I added the link because I thought members of said organizations/universities may have some interest in reading about these events. I can assure you that I added the links in good faith and not to promote any specific agenda. When I add links to pages (or make any edits for that matter), I do it with the assumption that editors who are extensively involved with a specific page may remove the link if they don't feel that it fits with the direction they feel the page should go. I will not be offended by the removal of any links that I've posted, and if there is consensus that a certain time frame that should be abided by, I will certainly post within that. :-) Bali88 (talk) 18:03, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Hazing sourcesEdit

I wasn't able to find any sourcing for the newly added information. In my research, I did find sources that various groups have made big changes to their organizations to stop the practice, but I haven't found any source that lists specifically how much it has been reduced across the board in the greek system or that certain hazing practices, like paddling, are rare. I'm also uncomfortable singling out black fraternities and sororities without sources either. I'm going to trim it back a bit until sources can be located. Bali88 (talk) 21:23, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

I'd cited the higher prevalence of hazing in the NPHC fraternities (traditionally black) because of an article I read, but sadly no longer have the reference. It may have been from the NPHC itself. I had a roommate once that was an Omega Psi Phi, and he said virtually all undergrad pledges had to get branded. From that point on I perked up when reading occasional hazing stories, and noted that incidents were split pretty evenly between the mainstream NIC fraternities and the NPHC fraternities - even though there are far fewer NPHC fraternities. (Yes, I know many of these have joined the NIC lately.) I'd leave this point, and insert a "citation needed" link. The NIC may also be able to steer us toward a reference. Jax MN (talk) 01:42, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
I've read that before and it's definitely relevant. However, I'd really like to have some solid numbers on how prevalent it in in NPHC groups vs. others before we post that. Someone's opinion that NPHC groups are committing more crimes than the rest of the greek community...I'm hesitant to post that without some solid data we can base that on and even then we need to do it with care. I did find one study that listed the numbers on hazing, but I'm dubious as to whether their numbers are correct. It said like 78% of greeks were hazed and like 50% of general college students. To me that sounds high. For instance, on their questionnaire they asked: "have you played drinking games". I know drinking games play a big role in many hazing deaths, but there was no indication that they were asking the question in a way that separated voluntary drinking games for fun from some sort of fraternity dictated drinking games that you can't opt out of. I'm suspicious that the numbers were off because of that. I mean, I played a lot of drinking games, and a number of them were with my sorority sisters, but none of them were what I would consider hazing. Bali88 (talk) 03:07, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

ReferencesEdit

Uum...Edit

Done. The discussed Edit has now been made. The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 03:23, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This Article emphasizes "for undergraduate students" in the Lead, and yet, while I myself am now a graduate student rather than an undergrad, several (at least 3) social frats on my campus have said they would strongly consider taking me nevertheless. Yes, I did tell them in full disclosure that I was a grad student, and they (chapter officers) still said that.

Now, if this is an extremely rare case and I'm just that good a sweet talker, maybe we can omit it from the Article. Alternatively, maybe we can say "at some Universities based on campus policy graduate students can also be considered" or something else like that.

...Or, better yet, maybe we can open with "for mostly undergraduate students" or something like that.

...And if 1 of these 3 actually comes to fruition with a Bid, I will definitely let my fellow Editors of this Article know. Just saying, just pointing out this admittedly rare case.

Whatever, I think "mostly" and maybe a note about how it varies by campus policy would solve this just fine. The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 07:18, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

I know of Social fraternities that accept Law and Med students, my own included. El Johnson (talk) 18:17, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

I'd be glad to make the changes, but we need something more solid (not that you aren't a great guy, but Eljohnson15 has yet to be added to the list of reliable sources. lol) If you can find a source, we'll do it. Bali88 (talk) 18:42, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
First off, I'm not usually this sloppy. I was kind of halfway to Margaritaville (or more accurately CalicoAndCokeVille) when I posted that comment.
Anyway, I don't think my Bid will count as a source even when one of these 3 frats does Bid me, because even then it would be OR albeit anecdotally valid OR. Am I correct about that?
Nevertheless, if El Johnson were to provide a copy of his organization's National Constitution, where it most likely does state that graduate students can be accepted at the discretion of the local chapter (and that's probably where he read it even though he himself is not a reliable source until he produces his source), that should be a good enough source to add the word "mostly" to the Lead. After all, one organization's Constitution is as good a source as any other organization's Constitution. How is that idea? The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 21:16, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
Works for me! See what you can find. Bali88 (talk) 21:20, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
Here is a link to ΦKT, and a downloadable version of their Constitution: http://www.phikappatau.org/learning/chapter-management/constitution-and-bylaws.html. Exact quote: "Membership Qualifications. Any male student not a member of a national college fraternity other than an honor society or professional fraternity who is pursuing undergraduate, post-graduate, or professional study" (Emphasis added). Does anyone object to using this as a source (clearly not the only example, but still a reliable source) and adding the word "mostly" in front of "undergraduate"? The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 05:28, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Nonsense?Edit

The first words of the History section of this article appear in the sub section entitled Beginnings, They are:

The Phi Beta Kappa Society, founded on December 5, 1776, .. 
is generally recognized as the first Greek-letter student society ... 
It was founded by John Heath, who had failed at admission 
to the two existing Latin-letter fraternities 

Shouldn't the beginning begin at the beginning? What were the first "Greek-letter student societies"? Are these numerically identical with the Fraternities and sororities in North America that this article is about? If not then what were the first Fraternities and sororities in North America? The article also doesn't begin with much of an exxplanation of what they are other than defining them as "social clubs". So are these like Playboy clubs or Working Mens Clubs or Derby and Joan clubs or Freemason lodges or what?! LookingGlass (talk) 18:25, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

CheatingEdit

An anonymous editor inserted a weakly-cited blurb about academic cheating at an Arizona public university, title and link only, creating an entire new subheader to impugn the entire American collegiate fraternity and sorority system. I've removed the section, and reposted here for review and further discussion, if warranted. The item was as follows:

(Set within a new subheader)

Fraternity and sorority members are the students most likely to cheat in college.[1], with several studies showing that fraternities and sororities have the highest documented rates of cheating and academic dishonesty among students. [2]

This is garbage. First, the correct citation for the first reference ought to be something like this: [3] It speaks to the faculty response and resultant obligation to address perceived academic dishonesty at this particular school, studying the survey responses of a sample of 2,000 students, again at that particular school. No raw data is presented, nor does it have a focus on fraternities and sororities. The single line that does mention Greeks is in the fifth paragraph which reads "[The study] found the highest rates of cheating among fraternity and sorority members and international students, the latter of whom were most likely to use technology to cheat." No further data was provided to understand this result in relation to the baseline, regarding Greeks, though international students in that sentence are similarly impugned as leaders in use of technology to cheat, 21% versus 11%, which I assume is their baseline. --The baseline for International students.

The second reference is worse, with a pathetically small sampling size of 244 students in a study from 2002.

I just don't think this is an issue that should be so cavalierly hung around the necks of the Greeks. Academic cheating may indeed be on the rise, especially in the vacuum where students are not taught a value system like that which informed their parents or grandparents. The first article cited in fact quotes a senior associate dean in her alarm that more professors didn't discuss academic integrity issues in class. I also wonder about that. I'd like to know, too, if there are variances regionally around the nation, or at public vs. private schools, or among those with or without a religious moral center. But to twist this into an anti-Greek conclusion is unwarranted. One would think that, since the utter implosion of the fraudulent gang rape story impugning Phi Kappa Psi was published by Rolling Stone magazine, that anti-Greek partisans would be more cautious in choosing stones to throw. Jax MN (talk) 19:37, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

No mention of "Party"Edit

It seems odd to me that we can have an article about frats without any mention of parties, which seems like a fairly significant part of what they do. I get that they do other things like instill a sense of honor and that sort of shit, but they also tend to have lots of parties. Ideally, there should be a description of all the idiot words they use for the various types of parties, such as "formals" and "raids." Dingsuntil (talk) 10:30, 25 March 2015 (UTC)


Additions to Multicultural FraternitiesEdit

I made some changes to this section. I decided to add Sororities and I discussed the history and adoption of the National Multicultural Greek Council including their standards and goals, yet more should be added about it's history and what not Kelseymar (talk) 20:30, 12 October 2015 (UTC)kelseymar

Requested move 21 October 2015Edit

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. The consensus was to move this and expand it to cover a worldview as it is presently the best developed article on the topic we have. No histmerge was necessary because the target history only had cut-and-paste moves from this article that were quickly reverted and fiddling with redirects. Jenks24 (talk) 12:48, 6 November 2015 (UTC)



Student fraternities and sororities in North AmericaFraternities and sororities – Undiscussed page move, edits have been made since the move. – MSJapan (talk) 19:52, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

This is a contested technical request (permalink). Jenks24 (talk) 11:08, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
  • This article appears to have been moved back and forth several times, often as a cut-and-paste move, so I don't think this can be considered clearly uncontroversial. Noting that when at RM/TR there was a bit of discussion about whether a histmerge was required, but ultimately I don't think it's necessary. Pinging MSJapan in case he or she wants to add anything now that it's at a full discussion. Jenks24 (talk) 11:08, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
There is already the generic word Fraternity for that. The contents of this article, however, seems to be about student fraternities and sororities in North America? Chicbyaccident (talk) 11:35, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose: the article seems pretty exclusively about student fraternities in the US and Canada, and not anywhere else. There is a bizarre cavalier assertion in the lede that asserts they don't exist anywhere else. Of course there are. Plenty. Any German (and many others) would laugh at that assertion. Walrasiad (talk) 06:12, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
  • Support the move, or else reworking our articles on fraternities and sororities. We have an article on fraternity. Sorority, sororities, and fraternities and sororities all redirect here. As such, there's really no need for the longer name: anyone who types in or clicks on the shorter names is coming here already. I don't think there is currently a better location for "sororities" or "fraternities and sororities" to point to, as sororities don't really exist outside of the college Greek-letter organizations discussed here. The title is further incorrect as it contains some discussion of fraternities and sororities outside of North America.--Cúchullain t/c 18:10, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
Regardless of anything else, if this article doesn't end up returning to the title "Fraternities and sororities", the old title shouldn't be left as a redirect here.--Cúchullain t/c 16:28, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose original proposal – The title is precise enough. I removed just "student" from the title of the article because it never had one for a long time. Also, this article discusses frats and sororities in the US (and Canada if applicable). --George Ho (talk) 16:25, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
  • Support - Sorry it took me time to find this - the redirects are extremely problematic now. The move problem is unilateral moves, and edits to the lede that muddy the focus. This needs to be a general top level article. What happened the last time was that it was moved twice without discussion, and the lede was expanded to include fraternal orders, which weren't covered in the article at all. Why is was then limited to North America was also the same author unilaterally moving the article because I commented that most people associate "fraternity" with college campuses. There are important distinctions between fraternities, fraternal orders, etc., and they weren't being addressed. This is what happens when editors act on their own without regard for precedent or discussion. I think we need to move it back to a general title, move-protect the page, and then hash out the editorial scope. MSJapan (talk) 22:56, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
  • Support, supporting the implied expansion of scope to include worldwide coverage of fraternities and sororities, particularly the Philippines, in one article. That is, merge with the history behind the redirect at Fraternities and sororities. It doesn't matter that the material is dominated by North America, at the top level the coverage should be broadest. The article here seems to be by far in best shape. It only needs sections added for fraternities and sororities elsewhere. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:47, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

NeutralityEdit

There are a number of statements in this article that appear to promote a point of view that is critical to fraternities and sororities. These are represented as statements of fact, but might better be organized under a “controversies” section. The following statements in particular caught my attention. Under the sub-heading “Homogeneous membership” • “organized for the benefit of a largely white, upper-class membership base”

         o	As whites are 63% of the U.S. population, so it should not be surprising that such organizations are majority white. 
         o	The demographics of membership is not an essential to what fraternities and sororities are.
         o	That such fraternities and sororities are organized for the benefit of whites is not substantiated by the cited reference.

• Members of fraternities and sororities disproportionately come from certain socio-economic demographics, which perpetuates an unhealthy divisiveness within the student body

         o	The term  “perpetuates an unhealthy divisiveness” clearly expresses a negative point of view and states an opinion as a facts in violation of Wikipedia’s neutrality principle.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thucydides2 (talkcontribs) 04:01, 23 January 2017 (UTC) 

Suggestion for improvementEdit

The organization and neatness were thought out since it flows very nicely. It was very knowledgeful the creation and its origins on how it came to be in U.S.A. It was also very educational of how the process of obtaining one and running fraternity. It was good to see the perspective of what it's like to be in one and the facts and information on being in one. The only thing I noticed that there wasn't too much information on sororities in the U.S.A and other fraternity and sororities outside of America. Its mention in the beginning but there wasn,t any information or facts about organizations. I wish it had more details about sororities and the process on it.

First residential chapter home?Edit

The article states that 'The first residential chapter home to be built by a fraternity is believed to have been Alpha Delta Phi's chapter at Cornell, with groundbreaking dated to 1878.' Unless I'm misinterpreting what exactly this means, I believe that Zeta Psi's original house at the University of California, Berkeley is older, dating back to 1876. That original house was torn down in 1910, so if this sentence was only supposed to refer to still-extant buildings, that should be better specified. This website is my source, and if needed I can probably dig up something more 'credible'. This source doesn't make it explicitly clear that the house was residential when it was first built, but I think it's implied and again, there may be more detailed sources available if needed. AxaiosRex (talk) 15:48, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modifiedEdit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fraternities and sororities. 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.

As of 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 {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • 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) 23:08, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 31 March 2019Edit

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Withdrawn by proposer. Please see the additional RM below. Cúchullain t/c 13:23, 8 April 2019 (UTC)



Fraternities and sororitiesFraternities and sororities in North America – Excuse, we'll have to bring this up again. This is not WP:PRIMARYTOPIC; it fails WP:GLOBAL and WP:PRECISION. Either the proposed name or at least we'd better change it to "Student fraternities and sororities", and preferably even in that case also with the addition "in North America" if we don't want to bring a whole much broader scope internationally. Again the WP:GLOBAL issue should be obvious to anyone who studies the international context the slightest. PPEMES (talk) 20:55, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

  • Support clearly a North America article. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:20, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose I'm sure it has come up before, but while I might agree if the title were merely fraternity or fraternities, in the English-speaking world, the phrasing fraternities and sororities almost exclusively refers to the North American collegiate fraternity and sorority system. Try a search on sorority in just about any English-language news agency, and it almost certainly refers to a North American collegiate organization of the type, as the percentage and absolute number of participants is greater than in other systems, and because they generate more news coverage. This is certainly WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, which is why it was renamed here.-- choster (talk) 01:52, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
If it only said "sororoties", yes, then perhaps. But "fraternities" without a disambiguator doesn't reach fully satisfying WP:PRECISION just because of the "sororoties", does it, since "sororities" is not a clear word for most readers just because fraternities - in the general sense - may be for many? Hence, in the end, a disambiguator such as "in North America" wouldn't hurt for the both precision, global and primary topic reasons. PPEMES (talk) 09:24, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
The use of the two terms in combination with one another is the disambiguator. If you used "fraternities" alone, yes, you might refer to the verbindungen and corpos and monasteries and the Masons and so forth. But "fraternities and sororities" together, in English, refers to the North American system; to add "in North America" is needlessly verbose and besides excludes the organizations in the Philippines (and perhaps in Puerto Rico) which grew out of the American system. By analogy, "fish" alone is ambiguous, and "chips" alone is ambiguous, but no one is ever confused by the term fish and chips. -- choster (talk) 00:17, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
While not everyone knows what fish and chips is, at least more people probably know what it is than "sorority" or the connotation hereby asserted of its combination with fraternity. "In English", as you assert, might be interpretated as in "English culture". Something I doubt, but if that would be the case, the issue with WP:GLOBAL remains. Besides, dishes named by edible things arguably don't really need the disambiguators as much. I'm not sure my objection is refuted by individuals here repeating that they themselves are personally informed of the connotation of "sorority"/"fraternities and sororities", and/or live in a context where that is the case, as seen below. The argument that this particular phenomena stretches outside of North America is easily objected since it still has its roots there. PPEMES (talk) 09:44, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose. It's primarily an American topic. Calidum 01:02, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose per arguments by choster. The combination of "fraternities and sororities", as a phrase, should leave no doubt as to what this article is about. Ostealthy (talk) 03:15, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
Obviously it does leave doubt. Whether or not "sororities" could stand without disambiguator, it should be clear to anyone that "fraternities" cannot, whether in combination or not. This combination is not known outside of North America, perhaps not even there, I don't know. But then we have I don't know how many English-speakers in India, quite a few in Africa, and then innumerous ones speaking it as a second or third language. In summery, those who are familiar with the connotation of "fraternities" in combination with "sororities" don't correspond to a critical minority large enough to reject taking WP:GLOBAL into account. Inversely, I doubt those who are informed about the North American connotation wouldn't be confused by a "in North America" WP: PRECISION addition. I would like to ask commentators on this talk page to apply some self-criticism in terms of universe of connotations, not the least since you could expect a certain introduced bias of users actually bothering commenting in this location. See: Category: Fraternities for starters. PPEMES (talk) 11:15, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment. I just realised that this request cannot be dealt with without taking the larger niche topic into account. Hence, formulating a new multiple request below. The above request may thus be prematurely closed, if you don't mind, and discussion relocated to the new one below. Please exuse the inconvience. PPEMES (talk) 13:15, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose, per the last time. There's already an article on fraternity that covers other types of fraternities. Sorority rarely refers to anything but college sororities, and already redirects to this article. Therefore, there's no real risk that anyone seeing the name fraternities and sororities will confuse it with any other existing article, and the hat note will get any potential confused readers where they need to go. The "in North America" verbiage is unnecessary for any purpose, as well as incorrect, as it covers material on countries outside North America.--Cúchullain t/c 13:22, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 8 April 2019Edit

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) SITH (talk) 15:02, 15 April 2019 (UTC)



– I realised that the immediate above move request cannot be dealt with without taking a little bit larger context of niche articles into account. Hence this renewed request (and the former one may be dropped). The request concerns WP:GLOBAL, WP:PRECISION, WP:CONSISTENCY, and WP:PRIMARYTOPIC - i.e. occupying "Christian fraternity" with disambiguator? No way, this should redirect to Fraternity. That is, if none wants to write a new article Christian fraternity possibly bordering WP:ORIGINALRESEARCH on the WP:GLOBAL intersection of fraternity and Christianity in general. PPEMES (talk) 13:14, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

  • Oppose, per the last time. There's already an article on fraternity that covers other types of fraternities. Sorority rarely refers to anything but college sororities, and already redirects to this article. Therefore, there's no real risk that anyone seeing the name fraternities and sororities will confuse it with any other existing article, and the hat note will get any potential confused readers where they need to go. The "in North America" verbiage is unnecessary for any purpose, as well as incorrect, as it covers material on countries outside North America.--Cúchullain t/c 13:23, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. Yes, sorority may hold WP:PRIMARYTOPIC without disambiguator. It's "fraternity" that bugs the logic, whether standalone or in combination. And, yes, I do object to the connotion of that combination would be satisfying to WP:PRECISION while taking WP:GLOBAL into account. I'd insist we can afford a disambiguator here. PPEMES (talk) 13:33, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
Again, the article isn't titled Fraternity, which is a separate article that covers what you're talking about. It's titled "Fraternities and sororities", and there's no evidence that that phrase commonly refers to any other topics. That's beyond the fact that the "in North America" disambiguator is incorrect.--Cúchullain t/c 14:40, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
Well, a WP:GLOBAL reader could be expected to know vaguely what fraternity could mean as a broad spectra of things, right? But but not sorority. While sorority could enjoy WP:PRIMARYTOPIC without disambiguator, since there is little competition of connotations, the combination issue still boils down to fraternity WP:GLOBAL connotation issue, doesn't it? Since the article title is a combination, we can't disregard that objection, can we? And no, fish and chips is a dish, and names of dishes may require less disambiguation: as for fish and chips the name gives more of a clear idea what the topic is about than "fraternities and sororities for a person limitedly initiated into North American student fraternity culture (which most English-speakers arguably are not). In other words, arguably for the typical reader, the article is about "fraternity (generic sense, in plural) and then some strange neologism", both interpretated as pertaining to a generic, international topic about fraternities and sonething strange - although the contents surprisingly do not. They pertain to a niche, narrowed-down, regional, usually student thing originating in North America. About the disambiguator, sure, whichever better one could do. It's to have some sort of disambiguator that is asked for, secondary what kind of one. Please note that fraternities has been around globally for thousands of years, and still exist broadly, internationally. Whether oriented for men, women, or both. Now, there are vast amounts of fraternities in different countries, for men or woman, for students or others, with Christian or other affiliations, that predate the existance of the United States for centuries, to put it bluntly. PPEMES (talk) 15:16, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
I don't see any evidence that readers from any country would type in or click on the title "fraternities and sororities" expecting to find any of our other articles. And again, if that happened, the hat note will get them where they want to go.--Cúchullain t/c 17:29, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment: Pinging everyone who participated in the above RM that was withdrawn by the nominator: In ictu oculi, choster, Calidum, Ostealthy.--Cúchullain t/c 13:25, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose: In general. The only ones here that don't seem like slam dunks against, are Christian fraternity and the two that already contain North America having that being moved to the end.Naraht (talk) 14:10, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
What do you mean by slamdunks against? PPEMES (talk) 14:28, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
To be more specific, Oppose all except for the three mentioned, meh on the other three.Naraht (talk) 15:23, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose: Some of these are wide afield from the closely aligned organizations on American and Canadian collegiate campuses. Niche pages should stand alone, serving the groups that identify with them (Philippines fraternities, or LGBT, for example.) The others may deserve WP:hatnotes or because of conceptual adjacency. But not simply because of the shared use of the word "fraternity." Jax MN (talk) 16:09, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose This is becoming WP:POINT-y; the merits of renaming Christian fraternity and Christian sorority are not one and the same with the merits of renaming the others. "Fraternities and sororities" is not a term commonly applied to organizations of traditions other than the North American system. The insistence that ignorance of the latter term makes the entire formulation invalid is baffling. -- choster (talk) 16:55, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
That's it. "Fraternities and sororities" is not a term commonly (in North America) applied to organisation other than to the North American system. However, Wikipedia is not an encyclopedia on North American systems, nor can we assume that the readers are informated in North American fraternity systems, nor that a given WP:ARTICLETITLE pertains to this narrowed-down niche, can we? Hence the help of a disambiguator of choice. Pretty much all lead section of the articles linked soon enough begin to make it clear to the readers that it speaks about fraternities in the United States, and most often student associations. Why not help to make that obvious in the first place? That's the point I'm trying to make. For a Christian fraternity, just to take one example out of the hat, consider Brotherhood of the Holy Sepulchre. North American? Not so much. Obviously I disagree that the above proposed renames are not related to each other. PPEMES (talk) 17:09, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
Ok. Per nature of niche topic, I guess, I'm afraid this talk page seems only to attract North American or English native biased contributors, cross-validating each other. Thus giving in. Have a good day. PPEMES (talk) 20:23, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Origins of Greek Letter naming?Edit

There should be some mention of how the whole Greek Letter tradition started. Valetude (talk) 11:52, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

Return to "Fraternities and sororities" page.