User talk:Naraht/Archive 3

NOAC 2012

This was announced at NOAC 2009 closing show. http://live.oa-bsa.org/events/n2009/live/thu/morn/noac2012.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ben b (talk • contribs) 05:27, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Lists of members of United States student societies

A tag has been placed on Lists of members of United States student societies requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the article or have a copy emailed to you. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 14:47, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Lists of chapters of United States student societies by college

A tag has been placed on Lists of chapters of United States student societies by college requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the article or have a copy emailed to you. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 14:47, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

re:Phi Kap Members category

Done. Let me know if you need anything else. —ŁittleÄlien¹⁸² 01:05, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Replied

Hey, I replied to you on my page. I assumed you would see the change on your watchlist. You might have missed it, due to someone else's comments. Henrymrx (talk) 16:06, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

re: Tau Gamma Phi page improvements...Thanks!

Thanks for your comment on the improved Tau Gamma Phi page.

I hope your continued vigilance will extend to all frat pages not just the TGP...in particular the Alpha Kappa Rho frat page...which is a knockoff of the TGP page...from top to bottom...including affiliated groups that copied the names but doesn't exist!

For example their "Skeptron Order of Law" group which is non-existing and fictional, is also posted in the Law Fraternity and Sorority section of the "List of fraternities and sororities in the Philippines" page...which is just a carbon copy of our Triskelion Order of Law which is a ligitimate group and in existence since October 2000 and duly accredited and registered in the Securities and Exchange Commission (Philippines) since June of 2006...(citations and references given). While theirs has an internal link that only points to the AKP page, but doesn't have a legitimate reference to an official website that will prove that their group is real.

We have the Triskelion Law Enforcers Group...so they also made a "Skeptron Order of Law Enforcers"! We have the Triskelion Seafarers League...so they also have to have a "Skeptron Order of Seafarers"...can you see the pattern? Maybe if we put up a group called Triskelion Order of Menu...I bet you these copycats will immediately have a counterpart called "Skepton Order of the Day" or "Skeptron Place your Order Here" groups just for the sake of having the same group even if it doesn't exist.

I am sick and tired of this Frat copying and mimicking our beloved frat just to look good and decent on paper and portray an image of legitimacy. I hope you will look into it and delete all orgs and frats in the list that doesn't have any citations and references to prove that their organization is really what they are claiming them to be. To avoid confusion and deceit or outright manipulation of facts and true information....Thanks again! —Preceding unsigned comment added by TriskelionTarantula (talk • contribs) 20:29, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Image permission problem with Image:James E. West (Scouting).jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:James E. West (Scouting).jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the image (or other media file) agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the GFDL or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the image to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the image has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the image's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Images lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 06:40, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Month typos

Thanks for the heads up on those months. I appreciate it. Pretty funny as I found myself with way more Jan/Feb corrections to handle than I expected and was hoping someone would do exactly what you did. Nice! LilHelpa (talk) 00:16, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. I don't do talk pages either. Enjoy the evening. LilHelpa (talk) 00:27, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Redirect#Do not "fix" links to redirects that are not broken

Thank you for pointing me towards this policy. I was not aware of it, and had been doing what it advises against for some time. I will keep this in mind when making future edits. Bankbryan (talk) 02:10, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Bairds

Hi,you said you have a copy of bairds, well I have a question, I know that my fraternity Phi Sigma Alpha was mentioned in the 1949 version, it was under the article of Phi Iota Alpha since both fraternities used to be afiliated. I was just wondering if there is any mention of my fraternity in the new editions. Thanks in advance. El Johnson (talk) 21:50, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, wow I cant believe that they completely ignored Puerto Rican fraternies and sororities. O well, but again thanks Ive had that doubt since a long time ago.

El Johnson (talk) 14:32, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Well I studied at UPR, Mayagüez Campus and some of my friends were in Alpha Phi Omega, its viewed just as that a Service Fraternity. They invited me to join since I am an Eagle Scout, but I didn't join. They do a lot of service projects and I know the administration supports them because the University president has attended some of their activities. El Johnson (talk) 15:04, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Medical School in the Philipines

I replied to your message at WT:UNI. I would check out this database potentially as a first cut, but I'm usually inclined to give established and accredited professional schools the benefit of the doubt. Madcoverboy (talk) 18:25, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Francis M and AKRHO

You were right in removing the Francis M item. It appears that the Alpha kappa rho himself thinks he owns the article, yet refuses to address the issue on the talk page. --Eaglestorm (talk) 02:26, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. I'm one of the primary contributors to List of fraternities and sororities in the Philippines and yet I try not to "own" the article in this way, but so few of those who add to it are registered users, and most don't care to do much more than the equivalent of spraying their letters on the wall.Naraht (talk) 12:27, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Ok. Heads up, Aeon put up a questionable-facts tag on the page's Notable Members section. refer to the message I wrote sa talk page. --Eaglestorm (talk) 13:06, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

I saw, I think on balance, that it helps your position for two reasons. First that the status when the questionable-facts tag was put on was your version (which helps with what things should be reverted to) and second that you have some references on your side. I'll continue to watch.Naraht (talk) 13:12, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

User:Psalms91, whom I suspect is a fellow fratman like USer:Alpha Kappa Rho, has responded on the frat's TP. --Eaglestorm (talk) 14:25, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Now if I can just get a translation in English. Google Translate doesn't quite get enough.Naraht (talk) 14:32, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm looking at it right now... here's my approximation:

"You know, any spouse or parent can deny that they are a member of any fraternity. Francis' fellow chaptermates or batchmates would not say if he was not a Skeptron. His hand sign doesn't matter because anyone can make an 'I Love you' sign. Francis' burn mark on his hand is a sign of his membership."

--Eaglestorm (talk) 14:55, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

OK little confused on the comment about chaptermates/batchmates. Would they say if he was? So his "source" is the burn mark on the guy's hand? I don't think that would count as a reference. Sheesh.Naraht (talk) 19:53, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Let me give you two other possible reasons why that isn't reliable. Let's say I wanted to join um... let's say "Alpha Beta Gamma." I rush ABG and they don't take me or they do and I drop out of the program. BUT, I want to be in so bad that I lie and get a tattoo or brand with their letters. If I move somewhere else, no one would know that I'm lying about my membership. Alternately, I could have been a member of ABG ans I got KICKED OUT. You can't remove a brand and tattoo removal is expensive. I can also lie about still being a member. So no, not really reliable. Henrymrx (t·c) 22:11, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

If you guys want to impart thoughts on the matter, feel free to jump in there.--Eaglestorm (talk) 02:30, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Some people never learn do they, as two posters on the talk page attest. How pathetic,they even assume I'm from another frat, when I've never joined one in my life!--Eaglestorm (talk) 02:29, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Frank Murphy

I fixed the link for footnote 80. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 21:34, 10 April 2009 (UTC) Stan

Formatting on Bo disambiguation pages

(Complex issue here, please excuse terse note for now.) Before reformatting section headings on Bo, please see the talk page topic: Talk:Bo#The_issue_of_NOT_going_to_second_.28third.29_level_section_headings_on_a_disambiguation_page
-- Proofreader77 (talk) 17:37, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Lex Leonum Fraternitas

Your db-spam was deleted from the article. There are other single campus Law fraternities in the Philippines that are apparently worthy enough, but this one isn't written in anything near encyclopedic format. I'll drop the guy a line and suggest that he use one of the other Filipino Fraternities as a guide.Naraht (talk) 12:33, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

I replaced the speedy as it was the creator of the article that removed the speedy template from the article, and subsequently nudged him with a standard template to notify him that he should use the hangon template in case he wants to challenge removal.

As you suggested it may be a good idea to give the user an example of a quality page regarding law fraternities; If it is notable i would rather have an article about it then just plainly removing it. Yet in its current form it would require a complete rewrite to comply with the guidelines - which is why i replaced the speedy. Thanks for bringing this to my attention, and happy editing to you! :), Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 12:41, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm fine with you bringing the discussion here... However someone else already deleted it on a G12. Oddly enough I can't find the article that the admin says it is an exact copy of.Naraht (talk) 13:17, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Support

Hey Naraht! Thanks for sending invites to other users! Thumbs up for you! --The Wandering Traveler^{WIKIPROJECT UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES NEEDS YOUR SUPPORT!} 06:29, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

D.C. Meetup, Saturday, June 6, 2009

The 7th DC Meetup dinner will be held this Saturday, June 6th, starting at 5 p.m. The event will be at Bertucci's, near George Washington University and the Foggy Bottom metro station. It will follow the Apps for Democracy open source event at GWU. For details or to RSVP if you haven't already, see Wikipedia:Meetup/DC 7. (You have received this announcement because your user page indicates that you live in Maryland, Virginia, or DC.)
Delivered by The Helpful Bot at 20:09, 2 June 2009 (UTC) to report errors, please leave a note here.

Scouts Royale Brotherhood

Firstly, thanks for taking the time to clean up the article and also for admitting your membership. Only suggestion I have is that the "Purpose" section is probably not a good idea as is. It makes it sound like recruiting. I would suggest simply adding a link to it at the bottom of the article (I'm sure it has to be on a website somewhere). I think it'd be alright to maybe just summarize it in the article as well. In other words, something like "the organization promotes X, Y and Z" without getting into so much detail. --User:Woohookitty ^{Diamming fool!} 15:09, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Actually I wouldn't have a problem with wording it much like the Alpha Phi Omega article words it. that's actually what I was getting at. Or if you want to keep it as is, I'd suggest adding the sourcing. The main thing is that otherwise it looks like the organization itself wrote it if you know what I mean. That's the main thing we want to avoid. If it's from a source (even if it's from the group itself) at least it looks reliable and not as much as recruiting. --User:Woohookitty ^{Diamming fool!} 15:40, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Header template? --User:Woohookitty ^{Diamming fool!} 23:53, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Nah, NPOV tag not needed. As for the header, how about "Outline" or "Goals" perhaps? --User:Woohookitty ^{Diamming fool!} 04:29, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Decided on Standards.Naraht (talk) 15:36, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Works for me :) --User:Woohookitty ^{Diamming fool!} 16:18, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Yep. I've been here long enough (4 1/2 years) to know how "fancruft" type stuff can get. I.e. users who are editing articles with extensive interest in that article and that article only. For me the struggle is the "American Idol" articles. So yeah. I certainly know what you mean. It's a challenge. --User:Woohookitty ^{Diamming fool!} 16:36, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

RGEION

Naraht, please forgive my incorrect re-spelling. I am sure you are aware it is unusual, and I beg ignorance of the correct spelling, as researching misspellings that appear to be typographical are (to put it mildly) not practical. Thanks for setting me straight! If you have any other articles which you would like to request I take a look at, feel free to let me know.--SidP (talk) 22:44, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Volunteer opportunity in Bethesda, Thursday, July 16

The Wikimedia Foundation will be conducting an all-day Academy at the National Institutes of Health, in Bethesda, Maryland, on Thursday, July 16. The team that will be teaching at the Academy, a mix of paid staff and volunteers, is looking for four more volunteers to be teaching assistants, providing one-to-one assistance in workshops whenever a workshop participant has a problem following the instructional directions. (We currently have two editors signed up as teaching assistants, and are looking for a total of six.)

The NIH editing workshops are only for two hours, but volunteers are asked to meet the Wikimedia Foundation team at the hotel in Bethesda at about 7:15 a.m. (time to be finalized shortly) and to stay for the entire day, which ends at 4:30 p.m. Lunch will be provided. (The full schedule can be found here.)

The team is not necessarily looking for expert editors (though they are welcome), just people who can help novices who might get stuck when trying to do some basic things. If you've been an editor for at least 3 months, and have done at least 500 edits, you probably qualify.

If you're interested, please send John Broughton an email. If you might be interested, but would like further information, please post a note on his user talk page, so that he can respond there, and others can see what was asked.

(You have received this posting because your user page indicates that you live in Maryland or DC. --EdwardsBot (talk) 02:22, 10 July 2009 (UTC))

Caspian Airlines Flight 7908

Lol, at least it's fixed now. Just need to establish that language in ref #11 now. Mjroots (talk) 12:26, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

BPOElks Lodge in Phillipines

Hi! I posted a discussion topic on why I changed the BPOE affiliation to United States at [1]. I would appreciate your input into the discussion. Thanks! --Manway (talk) 19:11, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Response posted. --Manway (talk) 19:53, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

I'll have to bow to your knowledge on that, as I'm still a relative newbie at references. Make changes as you see fit - we're both on the same page about this. But your sample ref tags were total Greek to me... 8^) All best and thanks! --Manway (talk) 17:10, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

RE: Changes to Alaska Senate

Sorry, I was trying to delink the Senators who didn't have articles, and I'm inexperienced enough that I didn't know how to do that without removing the sortability. Plus, with only 20 Senators, I'm not sure how necessary it is anyway. Nevermore | Talk 22:27, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

wtf?

I came across this page in your wiki userspace. In there, you have a listing for a page User:Somecreepyoldguy, which, up until about 2 minutes ago when I blanked it out, had a poorly vandalized copy of my userpage. How did you find this and why was my userpage copied and vandalized? Dr. Cash (talk) 21:52, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

RE:Phi Beta Sigma NavBox as Template

Thanks, I appreciate all the help I can get. This is the first time that I'm doing any major contributions to Wikipedia and I'm kind of learning as i go along...lol Educatedblkman1914 06:38, 6 August 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Educatedblkman1914 (talk • contribs)

re: List of conclaves

yeah, after doing some digging into some of my old stuff, i have located a list that has the conclave locations up to 1989. I could definitely use some help with the list as the exact dates are missing. I was thinking about modeling the list after the one for delta sigma theta. Also, I'm having some difficulties with some of the references in the chapters page i keep getting errors...Any suggestions on how i can clean them up? Educatedblkman1914 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Educatedblkman1914 (talk • contribs) 18:55, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

re:Wikipedia "adoptees"

sounds interesting, i didn't even know there was such a program on wikipediaEducatedblkman1914 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Educatedblkman1914 (talk • contribs) 17:21, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

okay, lets give it a tryEducatedblkman1914 18:05, 17 August 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Educatedblkman1914 (talk • contribs)

Whenever i edit a talk page and have to add my singature, I seem to always get a notice saying that I didnt sign...any advice on proper signing? 74.242.250.188 (talk) 03:31, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

APO-PHIL

I disagree strongly, as I don't feel that the parenthetical article title solution is the way to go. It implies that it's a separate organization, when it's not. The article should mostly focus on the historical aspects starting with the founding just after WWII, moving forward. We can put information on past APO-RP presidents and national conventions in there because that's part of their history.

The infobox should be shortened, removing a lot of duplicate info. The copyvio from the philippines page does need to be addressed, but can serve as a good starting point.

But overall, I feel that separating the two organization's wiki articles parenthetically is just going to contribute to further separating us, treating it like a whole separate organization, which I don't think is the right way to go. Dr. Cash (talk) 14:16, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

I disagree with that assessment. While legally, we may be separate entities, our history is connected together. It should done that way in wikipedia. Dr. Cash (talk) 14:22, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

I've put my rationale for moving the page at Talk:History of Alpha Phi Omega in the Philippines. Perhaps it's wise to see what others think. But overall, one observation that I see with the APO pages in general is that there's a lot of information being added in bits and pieces and individual sections, mostly large tables, with little prose tying it together. The way it's currently written, none of the articles on APO would even pass a WP:GAN or WP:FAC review -- heck, they probably wouldn't even pass a C-class review! I'm also seeing a lot of WP:MOS violations as well (e.g. things like external links in article text). The overall organization of all these articles probably needs a look at, by more than just the two of us. Dr. Cash (talk) 14:57, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Re: Alpha Phi Omega and List of LGBT and LGBT-friendly fraternities and sororities

I agree that friendly is a bit broad. That's why I think the list should be reduced in scope to those that align themselves as LGBT fraternities/sororities (in the same way that, e.g., Omega Psi Phi aligns itself as an African-American fraternity).

As far as APO, when I saw them on the list, the first thing I did was contact a friend who is an APO alum and has served in an advisory capacity. I think more fraternities/sororities than not have similar policies nowadays (not that I've checked my own fraternity's policies, but I'm pretty sure that, if not explicitly stated, non-discrimination is implicit). So I think just having a non-discrimination policy would open membership to too many fraternities to make the list useful. —C.Fred (talk) 02:44, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

OPhiA at Penn State edit

Hi Naraht. As you will see, Penn State (Alpha Theta) is still on our chapters list. They were founded in 2006, and on the previous list they were listed as founded in 2006 and 2009. They are out of Greek alphabetical order because we allowed them to take the chapter name Alpha Theta due to their ties to a local group, Theta Alpha Pi. Gtg425r (talk) 20:41, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I'll do some digging on the 71, 72 and 82 conventions. Just got a hold of some historical OPA resources from the late 80s and early 90s... never know what may be listed in there. Gtg425r (talk) 20:53, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

D.C. Meetup, Saturday, September 26

The 8th DC Meetup dinner will be held this Saturday, September 26, starting at 6 p.m. The event will be at Burma Restaurant (740 6th St, NW near the Gallery Place-Chinatown Metro station). For details or to RSVP if you haven't already, see Wikipedia:Meetup/DC 8. (You have received this announcement because your user page indicates that you live in Maryland, Virginia, or DC.) --EdwardsBot (talk) 07:02, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Complete DAB link check?

To answer your question: "is there any way to check all of the collegiate links (or for that matter the collegiate and city links) for whether they need to be disambiguated other than clicking on all 1400 links?", I do not know of any automated tools for link checking. Sorry. --YUL89YYZ (talk) 13:36, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi there

Greetings, Lieutenant Rock. My daughter Ael says hi (well, she would if I told her I was sending this message, at least...)

*trots off to order a large pan pizza (sausage, extra cheese)*--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 04:31, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Phi Sigma Alpha GA nomination

Hey hope you are well, I nominated it and now Phi Sigma Alpha is currently a good article nominee, please when you have the time could you review it. Thanks El Johnson (talk) 20:08, 14 November 2009 (UTC)