Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Fraternities and Sororities/Archive 14

Archive 10

←

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Chapters

10 Active chapters, 5 Inactive chapters, should chapters = 10 or chapters = 15? Naraht (talk) 00:24, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

I've often wondered that when I see the infobox in the wild. If anything we should change the wording of the label to be "Active chapters" to make it more obvious. I don't think the number of inactive chapters is particularly useful. Primefac (talk) 11:21, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

In the wild indeed. What about a defunct group that used to have 375 chapters? Would that be zero? I tend to go with the number of active chapters if the group is still active and the total lifetime chapters if the group is defunct. But what about a case of 125 total chapters with only 3 active? Some editors solve this issue by something like: 3 (active), 122 (dormant), but not everyone does this and I think it clutters the field. See my suggestion below. Rublamb (talk) 12:36, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Reposting my suggestion for the chapter field from above: We could expand this to provide the option of Active Chapters, Dormant Chapters, Alumni Chapters, and Graduate Chapters. These could stand alone or populate the Chapters field, the way Lifetime goes into the Members field. That would let us add these chapter options without having to immediately address the many variations of data currently in the Chapter field. Rublamb (talk) 13:22, 9 May 2024 (UTC)Reply Rublamb (talk) 12:25, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

My only quick comment here is that I *hate* using the term dormant in this context. If a GLO uses that term fine, but using it across the project, ug.Naraht (talk) 16:49, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Inactive works for me. That terminology would align with our chapter tables. FYI: I just came across an article that had something like: 123 (chartered), 12 (active) in the Chapter field. Rublamb (talk) 17:46, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

At least useful. A group down to 10% of charters. Oof. Naraht (talk) 17:49, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Naraht, by "I *hate* using the term dormant in this context," do you mean we should reserve "dormant" to describe an entire organization, and use "inactive" for individual chapters? I'd be OK with that. And again, I support the general plan as discussed. Jax MN (talk) 20:02, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Jax MN All contexts...Naraht (talk) 04:23, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Delta Sigma Rho-Tau Kappa Alpha Confirmed inactive

Could someone please take a look at my changes and tweek if necessary. Naraht (talk) 14:09, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Done. I really want to split this into three articles, but we have such a small amount on the merged group that this is not possible yet. Rublamb (talk) 15:52, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Good catch Naraht, on that 2019 announcement. Thanks for jumping on the editing review, Rublamb. I hadn't known of their demise. This is a great example of where it would be helpful to include the year of their demise in the infobox. Jax MN (talk) 16:17, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

@Jax MN, can you see if the joined group is in Baird's 19th or 20th? I would like to divide this into three articles, but the details post-merger are lacking. In the meantime, I am going to create the chapter list for Tau Kappa Alpha from 1963. Rublamb (talk) 17:01, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Sent, via email. Jax MN (talk) 18:41, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

So eventually (sort of like what happened with Kappa Omicron Nu), I *think*, a DSR page, a TKA page, a DSR-TKA page, a DSR chapters list, a TKA chapters list, and a DSR-TKA chapters list. I don't know if to be glad or not that we don't have any list of notable members.Naraht (talk) 21:12, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

That's because I have not yet look for notables. LOL. There probably won't be enough for a list article. Rublamb (talk) 21:14, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Anything to do other than the APsiO chapters. :) :)Naraht (talk) 21:16, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Exactly. Also, avoiding a GA review with really picky comments. Rublamb (talk) 21:18, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

What I'm avoiding is trying to figure out how to express the three separate articles in the ACHS page and ACHS template.Naraht (talk) 21:26, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Were the former groups ACHS members? Rublamb (talk) 21:50, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

as far as I can tell, dsr, tka and dsr-tka were all members, I need to confirm.Naraht (talk) 23:05, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

I found it; recovered an old ACHS page Rublamb (talk) 23:34, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

thanx. still thinking about it.Naraht (talk) 02:06, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

And we probably should have separate articles for the Theta Kappa Phi and Phi Kappa chapter lists.Naraht (talk) 21:29, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

I agree with this plan. Jax MN (talk) 18:21, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Single Line infobox fraternity usage

I *know* that all templates work if the are all on a single line. Most of the cite templates are intended to be used that way. But for Infoboxes, I find it annoying. Would anyone object to changing single line usages of infobox fraternity to have one line per parameter like the example in the docs? (there aren't many, maybe half a dozen at most)Naraht (talk) 15:08, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Fine with me. Rublamb (talk) 20:00, 22 June 2024 (UTC)