Talk:Fraternities and sororities/Archive 2

College vs. other fraternities

There is a lot of information in this article about college fraternities (in fact almost all of it), but very little about fraternities as a whole, i.e. how organizations like the Freemasons or the Elks are related. These need substantial additions; if you are knowledgeable, please assist. —ScouterSig 21:43, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

It might be most appropriate to re-title this entry as "College Fraternities and Sororities." There is too much information on the topic of the non-college fraternity to add it to the current entry. IMHO, it would be better to link two separate entries through inner-document links. Wolfraem 07:15, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Replying on myself, but I didn't read the archive below first. The issue with producing adequately researched and information-rich content for every type of fraternity or sorority is that it would be too much to responsibly put in one article. The college aspect is a very large one, and as most of this article already is biased toward the college facet of fraternal society I think it would be best to rename this article and start a new general-coverage article that avoids the detail this entry possesses. Wolfraem 07:21, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was I am requesting that this page be moved to College fraternities and sororities. This is because

• There is a page called Fraternity that is a disambig for the general term
• This article is almost entirely about the college socities only
• I would move it myself, but it is linked to by over 1,000 articles and I don't want to create piped links (I don't have AWB)

Please comment. —ScouterSig 14:30, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

• dont think the move is a good idea since there a lot of other tipes of fraternities, I am in a social college frat but I also belong to a social HighSchool Frat, my mother belongs to a Social post-college Sorority ext. There are also Service, Profecional, and other.. Thats just what I think.

Eljohnson15 14:58, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

• • That doesn't address the issue at all. —ScouterSig 15:04, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

• It does since you want to move the article to College fraternities and sororities, even thou most of the info in the article is about COLLEGE frats and sororities not all of the article is about College ones, instead the artlce should be expanded. The are many other types of Fraternities and Sororities including Social ones that aren't limited to College.

Eljohnson15 23:17, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

• • I think that that's the idea: I would like to make a seperate page just on the college societies; seperate articles should be made for high school fraternities, non-school fraternities suc as the Masons, etc. This article is so skewed towards collegiate groups that it should be separated out. —ScouterSig 23:35, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

I somewhat agree with Sig on this one. The current article is almost totally about college groups. There is a big difference between groups like the Masons and the Elks and college groups like DKE and AXO. If anything moving the College group to their own page will be a big benfit to the other groups giving them more exposure since as of right now they kinda get lost in the mix. Trey 00:06, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

What sig is saying makes sense yet I think that there should only be one main article especially since the type of non-college societies I am referring to are Greek-lettered Social Societies. One idea I propose is that the article be further subdivided to sections on the other types of organizations. The purpose being that they are all Fraternities and Sororities, most of them with the same purpose. Another idea might be to have different articles depending on Type, one for Social, another for Professional, and another for Charitable Fraternities and Sororities. these article can be sub divided. For Social then there would be 3 main sections, College(the largest), Highschool, and non-school, a basis for the social article would be List of social fraternities and sororities

example

Fraternities and Sororities (Category or main article)

* Professional Fraternities and Sororities (Article or section)

**Listo of Professional fraternity

* Social Fraternities and Sororities (Article or section)

** College

** High school

** Non-school

** List of social fraternities and sororities

* Charitable Fraternities and Sororities (Article or section)

**List of Service fraternities and sororities

Eljohnson15 23:11, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

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

It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it be moved. --Stemonitis 20:46, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

So...did this ever happen? I've had difficulty figuring out where this whole thing was ever left off. It seems to me that "fraternity" and its plurals as well as "sorority" and its plurals ought to be disambiguation pages. Same for "Greek Life." I feel like our "main" article ought to be "North American Fraternity & Sorority Life." I think that term pretty definitely refers to student organizations. We're not all secret societies, and not all collegiate (and I'm not just talking those high school organizations but NPHC often has "area" chapters and there are also alumni chapters which are worthy of mentioning). Yes? No? It might help eliminate this "ya'll aren't presenting a world view" opinion. We'd just incorporate the US, Canada, Puerto Rico (who ever put Puerto Rico in the section "outside the United States"?), and the few Mexican chapters that are out there. The banner for this project says "Greek Life" but then extends to student corporations and things that, yes, they're loosely similar but they should maybe be in a different project. Corsulian (talk) 14:41, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm playing with this idea here: Corsulian's Sandbox Corsulian (talk) 18:13, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Dead Fraternities/Sororities?

I was just curious, what do you all think of the idea of including at least some mention of dead fraternities and sororities in this article, like the original Kappa Phi Lambda at Jefferson College, and defunct organizations that had merged together into one, like Theta Kappa Nu and Lambda Chi prior to becoming Lambda Chi Alpha? I have to admit that I don't know much on the subect (i.e. - really anything other than the three examples I just gave), but I figure that it would actually be a fairly interesting aspect on the subject matter that hasn't really been addressed. RPH 05:45, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

I think thats a good idea other examples are Phi Lambda Alpha and Sigma Iota. Eljohnson15 18:13, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

I have created Category:Defunct fraternities and sororities to mark these groups. —ScouterSig 19:12, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Non NIC-Fraternities

There are a few Fraternities who don't fall into any of the categories listed (NIC / NPA / etc) -- can we make a section for them?

Can you expand on your request? What fraternities/sororities are you referring to, and what what could they be categorized? Wolfraem 00:22, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

The Big Three

I have read that at Harvard, Yale, and Princeton the Greek system doesn't function as at other universities: Princeton has its own fraternities that never affiliate with other universities; Harvard has some chapters of national fraternities mixed with a number of unaffiliated societies; and Yale has, in addition to the Greek chapters (which each year entrust their affairs to the members of the junior class, and are known as "junior societies"), four clubs restricted to Yale which draw their members from the junior societies, and which each year entrust their affairs to the members of the senior class and are known as "senior societies"; the most famous of these is Skull and Bones. Does anyone care to take this on? J S Ayer 23:48, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

I think this page should stay away from inclusion of or discussion of what seem commonly called "Secret Societies." One reason is that an article on these groups exists here and here, although the first article could use some serious TLC. The focus here is on the specific institution of the Fraternity(Sorority), and while these societies are structured in a similar fashion, they deviate WRT history, notoriety and affiliation. A link to the Secret society article at the bottom of the page would be fine, but outside of that their discussion would be better suited to their respective pages. Wolfraem 00:18, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

People outside USA

I posted a few months ago on this talk page. I was basically arguing that, for anyone who has not learnt by osmosis what fraternities and sororities are, the main article was incomprehensible. My post has disappeared and I can't find any new page where it might be, so please forgive me if I repeat it a little here. Firstly, there are no fraternities or sororities or Greek letter societies or whatever in the UK that I'm aware of. The only time a British person like myself may have come across one is on an American horror film like Scream or something. Simply put, every version of the article on fraternities and sororities has assumed far too much prior understanding on the part of the reader. We don't know what they are. We have absolutely no idea. The article acknowledges that they are rare outside North America but just gives vaguely interesting trivia about them. They seem sinister and cliquey from the outside but obviously Americans don't feel this way about them, so here are are few questions that spring to my mind, sorry if they sound silly and basic and inane to Americans:

What is the cultural significance of fraternities and sororities to America?
Why use Greek letters?
Are these organisations to do with freemasonry, illuminati or any other secret societies or religious cults, real or imaginary?
Is every frat religious?
Do you have to join one of them when you go to uni in America, i.e. like halls of residence or Oxbridge colleges in Britain?
If not, why join one at all? Why not just go to uni?
Why divide campuses and students into secretive cliques?
How are "frats" regarded by people who aren't in a "frat"?
Do the majority of students join one?

I can't think of any more at the moment, but I think anyone writing an article on fraternities and sororities must assume utter ignorance by the reader and must sit down and think what it would be like to know absolutely nothing about them. Cameronlad 17:04, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Your second point is already covered in the history section. And as for the others, I think they are good (mostly cultural) questions that could easily be addressed in the article. I perviously tried to get this page moved to a page solely on US college fraternities and sororities because that is what it is about--having a parent page on all fraternities could answer those questions even better. However, I'll see what I can do about adding some of that info in. Thanks Cam. —ScouterSig 17:56, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

It might be impossible to know objectively and sorry if people are working on it but another question that struck me as interesting to know is whether sons and daughters of members are more likely to join their parents' fraternities. In the UK for instance it's common(ish) to send your kids to the same public (US = private) school you went to etc. Also, the bonds of the brothers and sisters seem to be intented, ideally, to last far beyond university. I wondered whether there is a phenomenon like our infamous "old boy network", perhaps whereby members of the same fraternity or sorority positively discriminate against each other in companies, etc. The old boy network is quite well known in British popular culture but I wouldn't know American culture or media well enough to know of any references to anything similar with fraternities, or if this goes on at all. Cameronlad 19:15, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

I think Cameronlad's questions are excellent, and the point he makes is a valid and important one. I have a target reader in mind when I edit: a bright, curious teenager, who has picked up a decent amount of English but who comes from an entirely non-Anglo culture, say Albania or Cambodia. What can I write that can help to demystify the world for that mind?

For future reference, a) your previous posts may have been moved to the Archive, see box at top right of talkpage, and b) there is a tag that addresses the issue of USA-centricness, which I will add to the article. Many other articles could benefit from this nudge to their regular editors! BrainyBabe 20:15, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

I have to say, coming from a similar background to Cameronlad, I am of the same mind about the article as him. Theres's the perrenial problem of, if you know about a subject, you forget to include important details because they seem obvious, but if you don't you can't write the article! Interestingly, like he says, British views on Frats are mainly garnered from films, and quite frankly I've never seen anything that would make me want to join, possibly this is due to my personality or the view portrayed on screen. This is partly what made me read the article, the lack of understanding of why you would want to join, when obviously thousands do every year fascinates me. I think some more info on what they do would be good, rather than just names of colleges and frats. Talltim (talk) 16:48, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

I'd just like to add my belated support about all of these questions. Frats seem to have a disproportionate influence on university life in the US, and it'd be interesting to have that quantified. Is a "secret society" that houses students and carries out peculiar-seeming ceremonies really that important/relevant? Also, do frats still have the same influence they did in times gone by? How *do* non-involved students (assuming the system isn't compulsory) feel about it? I also agree the equivalence with UK-model secondary school "houses" is spurious. I do hope this article is completely reworked in order to make some sense. Trxi (talk) 03:51, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Working on it. Corsulian (talk) 14:53, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

I have created a new page, History of North American fraternities and sororities‎, in an attempt to start to give this page a world view. Eventually I will shorten the history on this page. If there is anyone out there who knows much about fraternities in the Phillipines or corporations in Europe, let me know. —ScouterSig 19:52, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I modified the introduction to reinforce the fact that most of the information on this page is only relevant to a minority of countries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.138.14.109 (talk) 22:04, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi there, sorry if this is messy or I haven't signed it properly but I was looking at wikipedia for information on the Business frat Alpha Kappa Psi, who are recruiting in Manchester University in the UK. On the list of previous alumni (on the AKΨ page) it gives another couple of greek letters e.g. "U.S. President Ronald Reagan (1981-1989) (Alpha Zeta)" What does this mean? Is it to do with fraternity structure? The main article here doesn't seem to explain and for someone not from the US it's all rather confusing. I also think the comparison between Frats and UK school houses is very misleading. Students in houses in all State Schools and day Private Schools do not live together or have a particularly strong social connection. Houses in Boarding schools are a little more like Frats in that students live together and tend to form social bonds, but I still don't think they're comparable to a University society in which people have chosen to become members. Do people mind if I remove that part? 130.88.167.5 (talk) 14:55, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

130: That second letter is the Chapter they were part of. —ScouterSig 17:11, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

OK, in which case this page needs some basic explanation of how the structure of fraternities work, in terms of chapters and how they relate to the central fraternity. None of that is covered on this page, probably because as is said above it seems obvious to someone who already knows about fraternities. 130.88.167.5 (talk) 15:14, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

As was said above, I also don't think this article does a good job of explaining what fraternities are. Outside the USA we have no idea and these are very weird concepts - secret societies for students seems to be a very American thing and totally against the university spirit. I still don't understand what they actually do, why they exist and why someone would even want to join one. It all sounds like the Free Masons for students!--Xania ^talk 11:06, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

They do not exist in Australia but thanks to Revenge of the Nerds and The House Bunny we have some idea of them. (Hollywood must really appreciate their existence.) I wonder if many, and how many, students never join. The abovementioned film's operate under the premise that every student must end up in a fraternity or sorority. Format (talk) 06:50, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

The above points/questions stil havnt been dealt with. The article has lots of detail about how they are organised etc, but not what they actually are, what they do now, why they exist, or why students join them. In the UK universities have student unions/guilds which all students are automatically members of, & which organise the sports clubs etc The article also needs renaming, what it is about must be 99%+ USA/North American uni/college, not general globally. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.166.107.74 (talk) 01:00, 30 January 2009 (UTC) To answer your questions Cameron Lad: 1) Fraternities and sororities are culturally significant because, at least in white fraternity and sorority culture, it signifies a good bit of the "good-ole-boy" network. Often you need to know someone to get into a house. It's also passed down through generations, often you try to join the one your father joined...even at the same campus! 2)Greek Letters indicate the important link of classical literature (Greek and Latin texts) which permeated the foundings of many of the fraternities founded before 1900. My own was founded off a Literary Society. They also can signify things that are not public. That is, we have a public motto, but also a secret motto that the letters stand for. 3)Yes, many of them are tied to Freemasonry and so on, but not exclusively. And especially not today. All of the founders of my fraternity were Freemasons. So is the case with many other fraternities. The links are not there any longer, however. 4)No, you don't have to join one. In some colleges in America, it's sort of "social suicide" if you don't, but that's not the case everywhere. It depends on region. Heavily Greek campuses (University of Alabama, Ole Miss, etc)it's very important. 5)There are many reasons to join one. It's a culture that you can only experience here. The connections, getting jobs, helping out the community through charity and volunteerism as a group, social life is far better, etc. You may understand it, if you went here...which is the problem with this article. 6)Those who are not in fraternities can be hostile to those who are. But many fraternity men refer to them as GDI's...or "God Damn Independents". The hostility works both ways.

All of this is just not good enough to be written in an article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.184.44.10 (talk) 03:09, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

I think one of the most important questions is how much of the university population in the USA does this affect? I.e. is it about a privileged minority (like the British "old boy network") or is university life in the USA dominated by this phenomenon? If the latter, I think we need to know more about what the hell it is! HairyDan (talk) 01:06, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Which is bigger, SAE or Sig Ep?

The article seems to indicate that both SAE and Sig Ep are the largest fraternities. I think SAE is bigger, but does anyone know? Newguy34 (talk) 23:27, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes SigEp has the most current undergrad members. TKE has the most number of chapters. SAE has the most total alumni living or dead but not as many active members as SigEp. It all depends on the metrics. So all three get to make the legitimate claim that they are the largest but all three claims should be qualified on the page with which metric you are usingTrey (talk) 05:05, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Lambda Theta Phi of Phi Iota Alpha??

Phi Iota Alpha was founded in 1934, while Lambda Theta Phi was founded in 1975, yet this article states that Lambda Theta Phi is the oldest Latino based fraternity. --Socrates SLB KA (talk) 23:48, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Correction, Phi Iota Alpha was founded in 1931. That line gets vandalized constantly by Lambda Theta Phi members that disagree. I restored the citation, supporting that fact. It's the same thing that happens to the Alpha Phi Alpha page, from other groups that challenge that assertion.2much (talk) 02:17, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

The Biggest

Before anyone gets too crazy, just know that I (yes--me, the singular entity) am in fact the biggest fraternity, sorority, secret collegiate society. I was the first of any of those things and if the records state otherwise then I am the spiritual underpinnings for all similar entities in the future. I was the first black, white, man, woman, child, Martian, and Inuit allowed to enter my society as well. Seriously. "The first" and "the biggest" are not facts. They're not helpful. Every one is the first at something and everyone is the biggest in some way. If we all want to start posting bragging facts, then let's start an article on rush shirts and brochures. As of right now, the world reads this and figures we're all a bunch of idiots anyway since apparently Puerto Rico isn't considered part of the United States when Greek Life is concerned. This message has been brought to you by a sense of constructive criticism, having too much work to do by 5PM, and a general attitude of all things that aren't to be taken to seriously.. It in no way is directed to any one user, anonymous or otherwise, and should not be read in a way that inspires anything less than a full commitment to spread accurate and helpful information about the North American fraternity and sorority system freely to the world. Corsulian (talk) 20:46, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

So basically the fact that Phi Beta Kappa, the first secret Greek lettered society evolved into the premier honor society in colleges is not helpful? It's not helpful to know that certain fraternities were the first to spread across the country thereby bringing a national movement for greek lettered societies? It's not helpful to know the first fraternity or sorority to create a national philanthropy, member development program, magazine, alumni club etc. whose pioneering efforts became models for other fraternities and sororities to join? It's not important to know what fraternity or sorority allowed the first non-white to join their organization since there was a predominant whites only rule both written and unwritten depending on the organization in the early days of fraternities and sororities? I strongly disagree that "first" and "biggest" are not facts and why you would consider them unimportant. These facts help make up the identity of each individual organization. Why not just eliminate "biggest" and "firsts" among any article that describes the subject in that manner? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.160.72.214 (talk) 02:07, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

My post was largely sarcasm aimed at those who focus entirely on claiming the "first" or "biggest." Specifically, I'm not sure it matters so much who is precisely the biggest GLO as that depends very much on measurements, perspective, and an understanding that many organizations do not have great and updated central record systems. I won't pretend that you have no valid points, I just feel that a general article on the history of the North American fraternity and sorority system should not become a battleground for such things. By all means, add them to individual organization pages. I believe the Phi Sigma Kappa page lists the merger with Phi Sigma Epsilon as the biggest merger in fraternity history and even that is contested. Does it matter? Probably. But I won't lose sleep over it being described as the "one of the biggest" or "a merger of incredible scale." For the kid in Estonia trying to figure out what fraternities are, I don't think it affects his or her understanding. To continue this discussion, please utilize my talk page or create a user profile for yourself. Corsulian (talk) 18:37, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

On the topic of firsts, a primary issue I had was that so much of the article was scattered with firsts. The first sorority, the first Greek letter sorority, the first sorority that used the word sorority, the first Greek letter sorority with uninterrupted existence--it just gets out of hand. I'm basically drafting a complete rewrite of this article and added this page as well--if anyone has particular motivation, please take a look and see if you like the concept: User:Corsulian/List of firsts in the North American fraternity and sorority system.Corsulian (talk) 19:55, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Request for comment on article title

P22575R15 left the following note on my talk page:

I changed back the article title. In the first place, you are factually incorrect, there are college fraternities and sororities in other countries, notably the Philippines and Puerto Rico. There are also all kinds of fraternities and sororities that exist for adults, both in the United States and elsewhere, such as Freemasonry. There has been ongoing discussions on

http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Fraternities_and_Sororities

and

""http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Disambiguation#Fraternity.2C_Sorority.2C_and_the_whole_deal

to try to have some order out of the different kinds of organizations, European student corporations, sororities, non-fraternity student societies, and to do so in a non-Ameri-centric manner, and to accomodate the wide range of organizations.

If you can come up with a better and consistent categorization scheme that takes all variables into account, please do so. But please do not half-revert an article here and there.P22575R15 (talk) 20:38, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

I can't think of an unglier, more unweildy title than Student organizations in North America (fraternities and sororities). Is there one Wikipedian anywhere besides you who thinks this is a good title? If you actually read this talk page, you'll find that several editors above feel that this article should be renamed "College fraternities and sororities" and not one comment in support of the current mouthful.

Also, your argument is incoherent. If American-style college and sororities exist in the Philippines and P.R., why on earth did you change it back to the cumbersome Student organizations in North America?. This article isn't about "student organizations"; it's about a very specific type of organization called fraternities and sororities; we need to make that the beginning of the article title.

We are under no obligation to conform the title of this article to equally horribly named articles like Student organizations in Germany (Studentenverbindung) (another article you renamed without consensus). Where on earth did you get the idea that we need some sort of awkward "scheme" to make the article titles similarly wordy? Studentenverbindung and College fraternities and sororities are far simpler titles.

If you can round up one respected editor who thinks your title is a good one, I'll relent. I'll wait for others to comment in the meantime but will continue to cringe every time I see the title.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 21:03, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I've just been to your talk page, and it appears you have a (short but spotty) history of renaming frat-related articles without proper consensus. You have very little to stand on here.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 21:07, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

I've contacted an administrator to undo all those unilateral page moves P22575R15 performed on on student organization articles. Now that that's out of the way, I think we could probably work toward consensus on a better name for this article. College fraternities and sororities makes sense to me, but I'd like to hear from other people.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 22:04, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Aside from being an aggressive revert editor, I do not know what you've accomplished. College fraternities and sororities does not take into account universities, the fact that this article only discusses North American fraternities and sororities, that there are different fraternity and sorority systems in the world, such as in the Phillipines, and that there is also an extensive and analogous Corporation system in the various European countries which needs to be addressed in any encyclopedic account of the subject. Specific titles with redirects from common terms is the way to go. That's how the wikipedia system is designed. All of this can be reverted to where it was before, but the prior arrangement had no consensus either. It was garbage, and many people posted to that effect. If people want to improve what I offered, fine, go do it. But ripping out what you do not comprehend is not an approach I would endorse. Going back to what was does not restore a consensus view.P22575R15 (talk) 22:44, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

We have it's 'wordy' and 'makes me cringe' on one side, and at least a stab at logical organization on the other. If The Fat Man can come up with a better plan, it ought to be adopted immediately. : ) Arrrgggh (talk) 22:56, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

How about "Fraternities and sororities in North America" or "Fraternities and sororities in the United States"? Both avoid messy disambiguation and give clarity and the organisations in question are primarily referred to as frats/soros not "student organisations". Timrollpickering (talk) 23:19, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

To Arrrgggh (note yet another redlinked SPA): Wikipedia's "logical organization" of similar names or concepts stems from a series of disambiguating links, not from a series of bizarre and non-intuitive titles. The fact that, for instance, a Studentenverbindung is an organization of German university students need not be crowbarred into the title. That's why we have lead sentences. There is not precedent or reason for the type of naming scheme P22575R15 is edit warring to preserve.

To Tim: Your idea is fine, but I think the bigger issue is where the link Fraternities and Sororities should redirect to. A huge part of the problem is the current state of the Fraternity article, which doesn't even resemble a proper disambiguation page. Cleaning up that page would be a first step; the dab page page would consist of a series of simply-named article on student organizations, fraternities and sororities, including this one--but keep in mind that this sort of "fraternity" is by far the most common usage in North America and the only notable use of the word "sorority"--so if those words don't redirect here, this article should be listed at or near the top of the disambiguation page. My main motive in this dispute is to make this article easy to find for people searching for the article about frats and sororities. Very few people anywhere use the term "fraternities" to refer to anything else--they use other names for the other types of (non-American) groups.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 23:26, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Also, as P22575R15 has pointed out, these Greek-style frats exist in the Philippines as well, not just in the Americas--so "America" is a bit misleading. This article is about a type of student organizations called fraternities and sororities that exist mostly but not entirely in North America.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 23:32, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

No, the Article is about North America, only. The article used to be about North America with a confused bunch snippets links, redirects for other regions, and a huge number or qualifying statements every paragraph. It's better to have things cleared up one topic per article. That's one problem, but the bigger problem is that you can't justify having one article called "Fraternity" and another called "Fraternities and sororities" That makes no damn sense. If "the bigger issue is where the link Fraternities and Sororities should redirect to" it should redirect to "Fraternity". I would have Fraternity be nothing but redirects to other places, i.e. Corporations in Poland, Nations in Sweden, Fraternities in America; with suitable disambiguation language. "Very few people anywhere use the term "fraternities" to refer to anything else" That simply isn't true. There are 5,000,000 Freemasons in 200 countries in the world; that's not a few people. Not everyone is an American, not everyone is 22. Look at Library of Congress subject matter classifications, college frats are a subset of a much larger topic. >>You're hung up on the word fraternity, not the subject matter, >>you don't have a comprehensive understanding of the subject, (at least not enough to go on a tear through all the articles).P22575R15 (talk) 00:07, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

(after EC)That is not what I'm saying at all. There are many, many of types of fraternal organizations, orders and societies but people generally don't call them simply "Fraternities" or "sororities"--there are other words for them.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 00:13, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

I tend to agree with Tim here. If it has to be renamed, Fraternities and Sororities in North America or Fraternities and Sororities in the United States since the article focuses mainly on the fraternities located in the U.S. It's a relatively clear name, and concisely describes what the the article is, without excess words. If there is an issue with Filipino Fraternities and Sororities being included, perhaps they should be split into their own article. I do agree with The Fat Man that the Fraternity article should be improved and clarified though. Samwisep86 (talk) 00:11, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm cool with that. Anything is better than the current title.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 00:13, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Great. Then I'll start posting in that article about the Oddfellows, the Polish Falcons, the Freemasons, the Elks, the Ancient Order of Hibernians, the Vetrans of Foreign Wars, the Knights of Pythias, the Knights of Labor, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, B'nai Brith, the Fraternal Order of Police, Daughters of the American Revolution, and the United Empire Loyalists, (Can.). After all, it's about fraternities and sororities in North America, and all of those are fraternities and sororities in North America. Excellent job, such an improvement. Fat Man, with your excellent and discriminating taste in article titles, what would we do without you??? P22575R15 (talk) 01:12, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

You're responding (rather bitterly) to claims that no one made. It's not as if I'm asserting that the fraternal societies you listed above don't exist. I'm talking about overwhelmingly common usage of the plural form of fraternity (i.e., fraternities). Do a Google search for "Fraternities" with quotes around it and see how many of the results refer to B'nai Brith. And sorority, for all intents and purposes, is never used except refer to the college student organizations for women.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 02:56, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition | Date: 2008 Fraternity. Organizations whose members are usually bound by oath and who make extensive use of secret ritual in the conduct of their meetings. Most fraternal orders are limited to members of one sex, although some include both men and women. The best-known orders are the Freemasons (see Freemasonry ) and the Odd Fellows, both of which originated in 18th-century England (although enthusiasts have placed the origin of the Freemasons at the time of the construction of Solomon's Temple). Most American fraternal orders were established in the 19th cent. Many were formed for a special purpose or for the benefit of particular groups; e.g., the Patrons of Husbandry, or the Grange (see Granger movement ), was founded to improve the lot of the farmer and was for a time an important political force. To a large degree, though, these organizations expressed a desire to establish principally male rituals. The Knights of Columbus was formed (1882) to provide a fraternal order for Roman Catholics free of the oath-taking requirement to which they were opposed. Other orders, founded when commercial insurance companies did not extend coverage to workers, provided sickness and death benefits to members. That function of fraternal orders declined as insurance companies expanded their coverage, and today most fraternal orders serve mainly as charitable institutions and social centers. Other well-known fraternal orders and their years of founding in the United States are the Order of Hibernians (1836), Knights of Pythias (1864), and Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks (1868).P22575R15 (talk) 01:34, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

All the more reason to clean up the fraternity article and make a list of simply named links to different articles about fraternities--which is exactly what I proposed above. Were not in disagreement here.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 02:56, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Fraternal service organizations should be differentiated from college fraternities and sororities. Many of these are primarily professional organizations and should be noted as such. They should be integrated into the Fraternity article. Plus many of these organizations have international parts that are sometimes larger than their United States affiliates. Samwisep86 (talk) 03:57, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

We are in disagreement. The names of articles you're choosing are senseless and confusing, just like it has been previously. All you're doing is re-instating the confusion and inaccuracy that existed previously. Why anyone would want to go out of their way to return to a bad situation is beyond me. Having "Fraternity" and "Fraternities and sororities" as two article titles in the same encyclopedia is indefensible. My point with the Columbia Encyclopedia entry, which you apparently did not get, is their entry for Fraternity not only is about the adult fraternities, it doesn't even mention the college ones. "Very few people anywhere use the term "fraternities" to refer to anything else" Apparently the editors at Columbia agree use it that way.P22575R15 (talk) 03:53, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

I would also like to ask that people please do not move this article any more times until we get a consensus here. Moving the article back and forth causes confusion and disarray, and may violate the WP:3RR rule. Samwisep86 (talk) 04:05, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Here's my suggestion: take all the information about fraternities from the article, put it in the Fraternity article, update whats left to be solely about sororities, and then move it to Sorority. Nwwaew (Talk Page) (Contribs) (E-mail me) 04:08, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

That addresses nothing. First, the problem is that the word "fraternity" applies to adult organizations more than it does college societies, the membership numbers alone prove this, as does the editorial decisions of other encyclopedias and the librarians of the Library of Congress, (not to mention the common sense of any neutral observer). Having the article on **American** **college** fraternities titled "Fraternities and sororities" is a plain error. The article is NOT about Fraternities and Sororities, it is ONLY about American College fraternities and sororities. If you want to have an article entitled "Fraternities and sororities" then it's going to have to be about every kind of fraternity and sorority there is or has ever been. The previous arrangement was NOT consensus, since there were ongoing complaints about it. And a consensus that is irrational is not worth defending.P22575R15 (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 14:42, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

"Fraternal service organizations should be differentiated from college fraternities and sororities. Many of these are primarily professional organizations and should be noted as such. They should be integrated into the Fraternity article. Plus many of these organizations have international parts that are sometimes larger than their United States affiliates. Samwisep86" ---I have been arguing that the whole topic of "Fraternities of any kind" can legitimately be broken up into different articles, because, for example, the American college fraternities are such a distinctive and complex institution in its own right.... However, I am beginning to think that since so many people can't seem to keep the topic clear in their own mind maybe one huge article would be better.P22575R15 (talk) 14:54, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Still bogus article title

The article title here "Fraternities and sororities" is saying that while "fraternity" could be any of a different kind of organization, (so it has to have a disambiguation page), the word "fraternities" must necessarily mean American college and university student organizations. Why does the plural of "fraternity" mean something specific, while the singular does not?

The article even says "The term "fraternities", ...generally refers to all-male or mixed-sex organizations." So, if you're talking about Sigma Chi, you have to call it a 'fraternities' or else if you use the singular, you could be talking about the Moose Lodges. That is what this article is saying. It is stupid. And if people who edit here cannot see that, then this will remain a stupid Wikipedia article. P22575R15 (talk) 01:28, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Because incivility is soooooo productive.... I don't see your point is here, and in fact all I've seen is a significant amount of disruption that ultimately serves no purpose. Justinm1978 (talk)

I made derogatory comments about an article. I was incivil to a 200 word wikipedia page. If you'd like me to apologize to the page, I will give that request due consideration. Wikipedia now says that the singular term has a dozen possible referents around the world and of great variety of kind, and that the plural of the same term has only one meaning. It would be like saying that the word 'vegetable' could indicate 100 types of edible plant, but 'vegetables' only means an avocado. People refuse to change it, and it is solely due to narrow-minded one nation point of view. It's indefensible.P22575R15 (talk) 03:20, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree it should be renamed. College fraternities and sororities is sufficient. Someone raised the point, what about universities? See College athletics, college radio, college rivalry etc--in the regions we're talking about, "college" is taken to mean schools that call themselves universities, as well as those called colleges. Also, no regional designate is necessary in the title, as long as we have a well written lead to quickly inform the reader which region we're dealing with. Keep titles simple.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 03:55, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

"Also, no regional designate is necessary in the title, as long as we have a well written lead to quickly inform the reader which region we're dealing with." Absolutely. No question at all. After all, the article on "Trees" can be about poplars, sycamores, spruce, and elm, and we don't have to care at all if "other" people from "other" places might think the term applies equally to the trees from Asia or Africa. To heck with them. It's an American word, it has an American meaning, if they want to have it mean something else, then they should do it on their own wikipedia. All you have to do is make it clear in the introduction that the title doesn't mean what people might think it means, and it's smooth sailing. We're close minded and proud. We don't have to worry about the rest of the world. Sissies. Keep my thinking simple. P22575R15 (talk) 22:36, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Enough. Make your point without insulting or belittling others; your incivility and sharp tongue are unwelcome here. --ElKevbo (talk) 22:46, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

I AGREE WITH THE PROGRAM! I accept the provincialism as being the true road to wikipedian greatness. I embrace the concept of narrow focus. I am sympatico with the spirit that disdains to accomodate others. What do you want from me? I even mock those who have a broad-minded view and call them sissies. How much identification with the Great Blindered Goal do you want me to have??? ---seriously, Kevvy, nothing I wrote above was an attack on any individual. YOU, on the other hand, are attacking me. Why you doing that Kev, attacking me? And talk about "incivility and sharp tongue" and you start off by barking out "Enough?" isn't that just a tad incivil? Isn't that by definition, a sharp tongue? Listen Kevvy, you seem to be up for picking fights. I'm trying to focus on content. Stop making threats of trying to get me blocked, too. I'm just making edits here, you're going off on a warpath against people. Now, THAT'S rude.P22575R15 (talk) 23:29, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't mind, Kevbo. I'm far more concerned with what he's doing to the articles themselves than his pissy outbursts on talk pages, which no one (thus far) is really taking seriously. Luckily, his bad edits, bad writing and MOS problems are easily reverted, and his constructive edits are significant, if sporadic. I would, however, appreciate if a few experienced editors watchlisted the frat-related pages.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 23:27, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

I put my reply up first since it seemed to preserve the flow of the conversation better, Fatback. P22575R15 (talk) 23:31, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Proposal to break out recruitment section

I'd like to propose expanding the section on recruitment and breaking it out as a separate article. Fraternity rush is a phenomenon worthy of its own individual treatment, and for which a great deal can be written. bd2412 T 02:10, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Globalize template addition

Decided to be bold and add the globalize header template to the article. I'm from the UK, I've just read through the article trying to find out what a Sorority is, and I couldn't make head nor tail of it. The link to Fraternity is impenetrable jargon, and the link to Social Organizations doesn't appear to have anything remotely to do with this article. I wish I could give more detail about where improvement's needed, but to be frank, I'm totally clueless. 86.175.113.38 (talk) 20:06, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

What is the general public opinion towards those questionable organizations?

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.85.130.34.157 (talk) 21:20, 18 December 2009 (UTC)