Talk:List of Chi Phi chapters

Combined table

One of our project editors had been working on this page, where our standard list format was challenged by the very complex formation story of Chi Phi as it exists today. Our aim is clarity. In this case, I thought it valuable to add a column for the predecessor branch of the fraternity and to split the city and state (or country), all with sortable columns. Here's what I have come up with so far, offered for discussion (late January 2023). Note that this list will also be adjusted in order by date of formation, not by alphabetical order, following our standard template. Thoughts? Jax MN (talk) 17:18, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

You read my mind in where to go with this but I was conflicted, mainly because someone from the fraternity (with inside info on dates and chapter closures) had worked on this list and it appears that the existing names may be Chi Phi's preference. For example, there are instances where there is a Southern Order chapter, etc. followed by the First. The first being the first chapter of that name after the merger. With your proposal, we could be renaming the chapters from the fraternity's standard usage. Nevertheless, as I merged, I left the list in alphabetical order to make it easier to rename the chapters and reach a consensus on how to proceed. Of course, another strategy would be to treat this as five fraternities with different articles. Baird's 1st and second editions should have the content needed to support stand-alone articles.

The only issues to resolve before moving forward with your proposal are:

1) The Almanac and the fraternity's article call some of the Orders by different names. We need to confirm whether United or Northern is correct and whether Hobart or Secret Society is correct.

2) I think the Almanac lists the wrong Order for a few chapters as there are two chapters with the same name at the same time. We need to refer to an older version of Baird's for confirmation of the Orders and their various chapters rather than the Almanac.

3) We should look for a Chi Phi directory to see if they do, in fact, have naming standards for these older chapters. If they do, I think we should retain their names, but still add the Order column.

4) Earlier editors had removed the Order name for modern or active chapters. I temporarily addressed this by adding an efn indicating the Order. The efn will need to be removed or updated if an order column is added. Rublamb (talk) 19:22, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for getting back so quickly. Indeed, the short-lived northern merger group gave way to the United Order, but the Archive doesn't separate out those chapters. Hence, in this model, I've been simply using United Order (The archive doesn't split out the Northern Order once the merger dominos started to fall.) I've gotten this done through variants of Pi chapter and Alpha-Pi, which set of five chapters are a Gordian Knot mess of names. The example list is updated, below. Jax MN (talk) 19:45, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Well I did spend a good part of yesterday merging and expanding this list... I thought this was a straightforward project but quickly realized how messy it was. I believe I found all of the chapters in the Almanac that were missing from the list, but suspect there are still a few lacking based on gaps in the Greek alphabet. Another item to look for in Baird's. Yesterday, I actually updated the list from Northern Order to United Order based on the Almanac's notes then later realized the fraternity's article uses Northern and does not refer to United at all. I also switched to Hobart based on the Almanac, but the fraternity article says the group formed at Hobart and was called the Secret Society of Chi Phi. I suspect the latter (Secret Society) is correct and should be reverted. These were questions I have not researched yet. But thankfully we both like a challenge. Rublamb (talk) 21:32, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

I've taken it as far as I can, from a comparison of Baird's and the online chapter list Chi Phi Chapters. There is still some ambiguity regarding Pi chapter, Alpha Pi and the fact that a few colonies were named, causing some confusion if they are listed among the chartered groups. As the updated list is now in mainspace, I will delete the example, here. Jax MN (talk) 00:30, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

I've determined three of the supposed five Hobart Society chapters, marked as such in the Baird's Archive, and have noted their branches accordingly. Can anyone determine the other two? Jax MN (talk) 00:36, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

I have found several 19th-century sources, one includes an article on the Hobart Society. I will check to see if it adds any insight. My quick review of these older sources noted several chapter name changes/variations, so I quickly logged out before getting pulled in deeper. For example, Alpha-Alpha (UNC) was formed as the Alpha chapter. Apparently, the requirement to change the chapter name was a point of contention at the time of the merger. Rublamb (talk) 03:46, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Question about orders

@Jax MN Northern Order was previously used instead of United Order in a list for this article. When I merged the lists, I changed to United Order to be consistent with the source I added (the Almanac). However, given the dates and chapters included, it clear that the United Order is the group formed by the merger of Hobart and Princeton that is also called the northern (little n) chapters in some older sources that I quickly scanned earlier today. Meaning that the United Order and the Northern Order are the same—a short-lived 19th-century fraternity. Based on the Almanac which is the cited source, it is not correct to label any chapter formed after the July 23, 1874 merger as being part of the United Order as that name was no longer in use after the merger into the modern fraternity. Unless you found another source?? Rublamb (talk) 03:21, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

p. 95 in the Chronicle of Chi Phi 1824 to 1938 by Theodore B. Appel says: "There was considerable mention made in the public press of the negotiations which had been in progress since 1865 to unite the Chi Phi Fraternity of the South with the United Order, bearing practically the same name, in the North, and which union into what was thereafter officially known as the Chi Phi Fraternity was consummated, March 27, 1874" This appears to confirm that the United Order (aka Northern Order) merged with the Southern Order to form Chi Phi Fraternity. However, on p. 244 of the same book: "First came 'The Ancient Order of Chi Phi' (Princeton), then 'The Chi Phi Fraternity' (Southern Order), 'The Secret Order of Chi Phi' (Hobart and Northern), and The Chi Phi Fraternity (United; Order)." So which is right? The Almanac certainly goes with the former. Rublamb (talk) 03:37, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

So the ruling document is a bit murky. I was curious about that, wondering if the short-lived united Order should be used simply to denote the surviving fraternity, and what was the distinction between that and the Northern Order. Since they are essentially synonyms, maybe we use Northern Order to promote clarity, prior to the merger with the southern chapters. For the combined fraternity, maybe it's best to go with "Chi Phi Fraternity" then. I found no national constitution for the combined fraternity, and the fraternity refers to itself simply as "Chi Phi Fraternity" on its website, today. Their archivist may want to clarify. Jax MN (talk) 03:44, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

I think I have found the 1874 constitution in the source which mentions that it could be republished because "it was never secret". I know for sure that I found a summary of the conference where the merger took place. I will do some reading tomorrow, starting with the oldest publication to see what I can find. I don't know whether to thank or hate Hathi Trust for digitizing these resources. Maybe a newspaper will be more helpful--I will check Newspapers.com too. Rublamb (talk) 04:00, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Beta chapter

Rublamb, I note that you reordered the Beta chapters, with some slight renaming. The reason I cast these the way I did is that the Beta chapter from the Southern Order closed prior to any merger activity. There were several cases like this where a Southern Order chapter had died out and yet an identically-named chapter from one of the northern branches was labeled (first) -- even though it were created earlier. Assuming this was a Chi Phi staff decision on their naming convention, I left several of the southern chapters with such old names out of that progression of first-second-third. The only odd duck then was the Harvard chapter, whose name reverted (it seems) to a school that had previously held it, and was revived. With all this in mind, would you review your changes to Beta and let me know your thoughts? We may have to ping their national HQ and ask the archivist to weigh in. Jax MN (talk) 03:44, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Ha! I had warned you that this would show up when renaming. My guess is this is the reason for the Beta of Southern Order business. Unless we find otherwise, I would give the oldest (first formed) the name first, and go forward from there as per normal. Otherwise, it is too confusing to have a chapter labeled the first actually be the second, etc. Rublamb (talk) 03:54, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

I also had the intuition that the names you had used when you originally combined the several lists, that these had come from a Chi Phi insider or someone with clear knowledge of their own naming preferences. For example, you also used Beta (first) to denote the Harvard chapter, which was the fourth formed under that name, and this comes from the original article before you and I began work on it in Jan 2023. On Wikipedia, we tend to roll with those names as the organizations themselves confirm them (noting this for future readers). The only time I deviate from this is when I find a clear error, or a discrepancy between sources. Jax MN (talk) 04:11, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I assumed that issue was resolved when you changed the other names. Rublamb (talk) 04:57, 30 January 2023 (UTC)