Talk:University of Virginia fraternities and sororities/Archive 1

Archive 1

Date of founding

The column is called Date of founding, so I've included Month and Day of founding, if I can locate it.Naraht (talk) 00:13, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 7 external links on University of Virginia Greek life. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110928084158/http://www.pikes.org/historyA.aspx to http://www.pikes.org/historyA.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130125225428/http://www.pikes.org:80/historyB.aspx to https://www.pikes.org/historyB.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130125225448/http://www.pikes.org:80/historyC.aspx to https://www.pikes.org/historyC.aspx
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20150714080638/http://www.uvamgc.com/ to http://www.uvamgc.com/#!mgcchapters/cfvg
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20150714080638/http://www.uvamgc.com/ to http://www.uvamgc.com/#!about-us/cjg9
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20150427171528/http://www.aepimu.com/about.php to http://aepimu.com/about.php
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20150618024303/http://www.uvamgc.com:80/ to http://www.uvamgc.com/

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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 II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:33, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Some notes

Hello! I'm a current student at U.Va. and a member of the greek system- there are some updates that could be included in this draft!

I believe Delta Sigma Phi also has a lawn room in addition to the others, although I can't find a good source for it, but there has been a delta sig living in the same room for years and they pass it down.

The section on the Rolling Stone article also should be updated with the Columbia School of Journalism review -- http://www.cjr.org/investigation/rolling_stone_investigation.php

Alpha Sigma Phi became residential this last year and has a house on Jefferson Park Avenue, although I can't find a source for that either.

The nicknames of the sororities and fraternities should be more uniform and added to. Sigma Delta Tau = Sig Delt in addition to SDT, Delta Sigma Phi = Delta Sig, Theta Delta Chi= Theta Delt in addition to TDX, also Alpha Chi Omega should be Alpha Chi but that name hasn't really been used although the sisters want it to be

Sorry for the lack of concrete sources! I thought I'd be better to have the info than not. --Wannesa (talk) 17:00, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Hey Wannesa, thanks for the input! I added the CJR report and some of the nicknames. If you can find sources on the ADPhi house or the Delta Sig lawn room, feel free to add the info or leave it here and someone else can add it in. I don't think Delta Sig has a reserved room, but I could be wrong. Puppysnot (talk) 13:20, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Chapter name column?

Should there be a chapter name column? For example, Alpha Phi Omega's chapter at UVa is Theta.Naraht (talk) 22:43, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

I considered that, but decided it wasn't necessary enough to include and might make the table too cluttered. I generally mentioned chapter designation (if I could find it) and any nicknames in the "Notes" column. We could always change that if people disagree. Puppysnot (talk) 23:37, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

I'll add to notes. I'll try to find as many as I can.Naraht (talk) 00:13, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Inconsistency of Founding Dates

AEPi's founding date is given as its first arrival at UVA, ADPhi's founding date is for the most recent incarnation. IMO, first chartering date should be used.Naraht (talk) 12:11, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

That's fine, and it's something I thought of doing as well. I originally went with the more recent date for consistency's sake, since the university's IFC recognizes ADPhi's founding as 2010. But using the original date would better represent the chapter's history. I'll change it accordingly. Puppysnot (talk) 18:03, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Run through

I got everything that I could find with web searches. The chapter name exists for all, just not split out. I have founding dates for most of them, some of them, especially some of the pre-civil war ones don't know anything other than the year. Let me know if there are any lacking that you want me to try some sort of deeper search.Naraht (talk) 00:27, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for all of your help, Naraht. I think it looks pretty great right now, and I don't see any serious gaps or omissions anywhere. I'll let you know if something else comes up. Puppysnot (talk) 03:35, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Controversy

I was reading the page on Phi Kappa Psi and noticed under the controversy section of that page, there was a 1992 gang rape case at the UVA chapter. It caught my eye because I had only recently read about the 2014 rolling stones controversy and came here to double check if it was the same fraternity, then noticed it is not even mentioned in here.

I am not a frequent editor, would someone else mind adding it if they think it is appropriate?

2601:240:C600:16ED:E893:BAB4:E45D:D87D (talk) 03:41, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Easters Photo?

I'd love to have a photo of Easters included in the article. If anyone has an idea of a free-use photo that could be uploaded, feel free to let me know. This is probably the most well-known photo, but unfortunately I don't believe it's in the public domain. Puppysnot (talk) 19:44, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:University of Virginia Greek life/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Agtx (talk · contribs) 21:26, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Not perfect, but very close. Writing is overall good, tone is right, and it is generally concise. The main UVA article uses UVA instead of UVa. This should match. There are two "1970s" sections in the History section, which is a little odd. The sororities section says "1970s and 1980s" but then doesn't talk about anything related to the '80s. Can those two sections be combined in some way, if we're doing this chronologically as opposed to by topic? -- All resolved
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Solid here. The style is right, the layout is good, and the way that the table of organizations has been incorporated is, I think, the best way to do it. That avoids going into unnecessary detail on each organization.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Reference list looks good.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Although many of the sources are primary sources, I'm not sure where else we'd get a lot of this information. I'd say, therefore, that the quality of the in-line sources is sufficient.
	2c. it contains no original research.	There are some areas that are missing sources. The lede of University_of_Virginia_Greek_life#Service_fraternities.2C_professional_fraternities_and_honor_societies is entirely unsourced claims ("thriving social atmospheres") and needs to be rewritten. The last paragraph of "early 1900s" is missing inline cites, and contains claims that the 1981 book can't support ("still in place today"). The second paragraph in the 2000s section has the same problem. -- All resolved
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Does not appear to be missing coverage on any key areas.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Although the table listing every Greek organization is lengthy, I think it's well-sourced and the best way to present this information.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Does not appear to have any neutrality problems. Treatment of the Rolling Stone controversy is good.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	No evidence of instability.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Images looks good
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Images are relevant and add to the article.
	7. Overall assessment.

Hi Agtx, thanks for reviewing this for me! I just finished addressing all of your comments. I'll list them below:

• I changed all instances of UVa to UVA.
• I consolidated the two 1970s sections under a new "Late 1900s" section.
• I shortened the lead of the Professional and Honor Fraternities section, removed unsource-able claims and added a reference describing the nature of professional and honor societies
• I more explicitly cited the early 1900s paragraph, including a couple new sources
• I more explicitly cited the 2000s paragraph, including a couple new sources

With these improvements I hope the article will be able to pass GA review. Let me know if there are any other issues.Puppysnot (talk) 00:33, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Agtx, any other comments or concerns? I want to make sure I'm able to address them before the 7-day window is up. Thanks! Puppysnot (talk) 19:04, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

The Rolling Stone article

Regarding the fraudulent story in Rolling Stone magazine, entitled "A Rape on Campus" and authored by Sabrina Erdely. I don't think the Controversies paragraph explains the outcome strongly enough. As I recall, Phi Psi earned an enormous settlement from the school and/or the magazine (and possibly the author of the story and the student who defamed the fraternity), which should be clarified front and center as the point of the scandal.

UPDATED INFO: Nicole Eramo, the former UVA Associate Dean who was defamed in the story won a $7.5M settlement from Rolling Stone, and the fraternity, which sought redress for "the wanton destruction caused to Phi Kappa Psi by Rolling Stone's intentional, reckless, and unethical behavior", settled their lawsuit for $1.65M. It doesn't appear the fraternity sued the administration, nor the alleged victim/student, even while they may have had grounds.

Kind of like the fraudulent Duke Lacrosse rape story, the lesson here is the magazine's, the reporter's, and the national media's rush to judgement and willingness to accept that such behavior occurred without a single pause to question the narrative... The administration didn't help the fraternity, rather, it distanced itself and let them hang in the wind. The 'reporter' was admonished later for perpetrating the worst case of journalistic malpractice that year. The Columbia Journalism Review called the story "this year's media-fail sweepstakes".. It was journalistic malpractice and feckless virtue signaling to the mob by the magazine and by the administration. --At least those are the reasons cited whereby the fraternity won their defamation lawsuits. Anyone with more accurate knowledge of this wish to take a run at improving the section?

These references may help: See standalone Wikipedia article: A Rape on Campus Original post: Jax MN (talk) 07:02, 10 December 2020 (UTC), Section updated: Jax MN (talk) 17:00, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

References