Template talk:Infobox fraternity
Latest comment: 19 days ago by Naraht in topic Scope w/ Puerto Rico
 | This template was considered for deletion on 2018 April 24. The result of the discussion was "no consensus". |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Infobox fraternity template. |
|
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 3 months  |
 | This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
Colony name
editShould we have a parameter called colony_name, so the fraternities/sororities that use something like "Associate Chapter" can show that? Naraht (talk) 17:58, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
- If we do, it would need 1 and 2 options as there are some fraternities that have two name variations. However, since we have somewhat decided to use "colony" in the chapter table regardless of internal names, I am not sure this is needed. Rublamb (talk) 15:54, 7 July 2025 (UTC)
Location_name
editShall we have a parameter allowing Headquarters to be changed to something else for the situation where the group has a national mailing address, but that isn't a headquarters?Naraht (talk) Naraht (talk) 17:59, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
Scope with shrinkage
editSigma Delta Tau has more than 100 chapters all of the actives are in the US but among the inactives is one in Canada. So what for scope?
- North America
- North America (formerly National (US))
- National (US)
- Something else?
(Chi Omega is in similar situation) Naraht (talk) 15:25, 2 June 2025 (UTC)
- I prefer to label these as either North America or International. Once they have established a chapter outside the US, they often will retain alumni in that country for many years, and because the organization went through the exercise of forming a non-US unit, they retain that knowledge base and a named external chapter, regardless of active or inactive status. Kind of like, once an entity is notable, it remains notable; time does not erode its notability, for Wikipedia purposes. A curious rule, but one I endorse. Jax MN (talk) 18:49, 2 June 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you. At the country level, I think staying "North America" should be fine. A follow up question. If a GLO had 50 chapters around the US and is now down to one, should it remain as National (US) in scope as opposed to "Local (formerly National (US))" if that last chapter died, we'd have scope "National (US)"...Naraht (talk) 14:13, 3 June 2025 (UTC)
- I think scope should be based on the ___location of active chapters, just like the chapter and colony numbers reflect active chapters, rather than chartered chapters. It is inaccurate to call a fraternity "international" that had one chapter in another country 75 years ago. (There are examples of this). We already have confusion with groups calling themselves "international" because they have alumni who "live around the world". Rublamb (talk) 15:52, 7 July 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you. At the country level, I think staying "North America" should be fine. A follow up question. If a GLO had 50 chapters around the US and is now down to one, should it remain as National (US) in scope as opposed to "Local (formerly National (US))" if that last chapter died, we'd have scope "National (US)"...Naraht (talk) 14:13, 3 June 2025 (UTC)
Additional fields
editThere are two entries used in Free_label *much* more than any others:
- Zirkel. Right now, between Zirkel and [[Zirkel (Studentenverbindung)|Zirkel]], we have 28 entries. Presuming we add it, any feelings on where? I completely feel that "Zirkel" should be linked as above.
- Former Name. Between Former Name, Former Names, and Formerly, we have 35 entries. Presuming we add it, any feelings on where?Naraht (talk) 15:36, 7 July 2025 (UTC)
- I would go with Former_name as that goes with Former_affiliation. Should we use Zirkel or the translation Monogram? I know I started the tradition of using Zirkel but have always felt it might be confusing since we are not defining Zirkel in each article. However, I guess have a link could solve that. Rublamb (talk) 15:46, 7 July 2025 (UTC)
- Sounds good. Zirkel at the end or farther up?Naraht (talk) 15:42, 8 July 2025 (UTC)
- I would put it under the badge field Rublamb (talk) 15:43, 8 July 2025 (UTC)
- Right now the order goes: ...Member badge, pledge pin, colony badge, colony pin, colors, symbol, flag. It seems logical to be after colony pin and before colors. Does that work?Naraht (talk) 17:38, 8 July 2025 (UTC)
- I was originally thinking it would replace Badge, since most German fraternities do not have pins. The only other consideration is that colors are more important to German fraternities than their Zirkel. So, it could hang out down with Flag. I'm good either way. If you can also add it to the VE code set, I will be happy to move all of the images. Rublamb (talk) 18:47, 8 July 2025 (UTC)
- OK. Immediately before flag. And let's face it, I'd be surprised if we had 3 articles that included the word zirkel anywhere in the source that won't have this done. I'll add Zirkel in the next day at most.18:50, 8 July 2025 (UTC)
- Rublamb Done. Corps Hubertia Freiburg used as test. Have fun. :) Naraht (talk) 20:42, 8 July 2025 (UTC)
- I had to add it to TemplateData, which is how you change what shows in VE and a few other places. No big deal. I also updated in the description list. However, that reminded me, I am still cannot remove Kaleidoscope from TemplateData without breaking the list. It was added differently from the other fields I have removed previously. Can you take a look and see if you can figure out the issue. The way it is, Kaleidoscope is still an option in VE which is annoying. Thanks. Rublamb (talk) 01:46, 9 July 2025 (UTC)
- I removed two occurances of Kaleidoscopes (plural) from the structure of the doc, see if that helps.Naraht (talk) 13:28, 9 July 2025 (UTC)
- You fixed it! I have tried removing it several times, just like I did with other successful removals. It had to be a stray bracket. Rublamb (talk) 21:59, 9 July 2025 (UTC)
- I removed two occurances of Kaleidoscopes (plural) from the structure of the doc, see if that helps.Naraht (talk) 13:28, 9 July 2025 (UTC)
- OK. Immediately before flag. And let's face it, I'd be surprised if we had 3 articles that included the word zirkel anywhere in the source that won't have this done. I'll add Zirkel in the next day at most.18:50, 8 July 2025 (UTC)
- I was originally thinking it would replace Badge, since most German fraternities do not have pins. The only other consideration is that colors are more important to German fraternities than their Zirkel. So, it could hang out down with Flag. I'm good either way. If you can also add it to the VE code set, I will be happy to move all of the images. Rublamb (talk) 18:47, 8 July 2025 (UTC)
- Right now the order goes: ...Member badge, pledge pin, colony badge, colony pin, colors, symbol, flag. It seems logical to be after colony pin and before colors. Does that work?Naraht (talk) 17:38, 8 July 2025 (UTC)
- I would put it under the badge field Rublamb (talk) 15:43, 8 July 2025 (UTC)
- Sounds good. Zirkel at the end or farther up?Naraht (talk) 15:42, 8 July 2025 (UTC)
Former_name
editWhere do you think for this, doesn't seem right to have it just after name.Naraht (talk) 13:28, 9 July 2025 (UTC)
- I am thinking after founding date and birthplace. Otherwise it seems really random. Infobox university does place former names at the very top, but those tend to be more significant than local GLO names. Rublamb (talk) 21:57, 9 July 2025 (UTC)
- Sounds good. Jax MN opinion?Naraht (talk) 02:49, 12 July 2025 (UTC)
- I think the discussion turns on an assessment of what information is most often needed, and that often, the final state would be to deal with this as a historical paragraph, eventually omitting the merged or former name. As these older names move further and further back in the rear view mirror, items like symbols, (current) pin, publication and current chapter count seem more important. FIJI remains a notable exception to this rule, and thus commands a reasonable one-off resolution. For the others, let's put the older name toward the bottom, just above the address. I like the current format where address, city, state, ZIP are followed by website, which is the last field. (A separate field trailing this for footnotes is incorrect, as I understand infobox rules.)
- The test cases I've been considering -- I.C. Sorosis or some of the fully absorbed nationals like Beta Kappa, or the two fraternities that more recently formed Phi Kappa Theta -- all these have slightly different treatment, based on how recently these name changes were made. I.C. Sorosis is, now, simply a redirect to Pi Beta Phi. Beta Kappa, merged during WWII is back far enough so that it no longer needs to be listed in the infobox, but still has a separate, linked article. Phi Kappa Theta addresses their more recent merger-of-equals as more of a formative and core part of their history, so the two predecessor names have a more prominent placement in the infobox. As to the bulk of the others, I think placing the merged or prior name toward the bottom, just above the address field, is best, until such time as that item is omitted entirely. Jax MN (talk) 19:48, 12 July 2025 (UTC)
- If we were dealing only former names as a local, I would agree. However, it is not that simple. We are looking at groups such as National Speech and Debate Association which was called the National Forensic League from 1925 to 2013. Or the North American Interfraternity Conference, formerly the National Interfraternity Conference. Of course, we could specify what is or is not worthy of inclusion based on scope and longevity. There are also the now locals that were previously a chapter of a national; although that info can easily go in former affiliation. But if we are going to exclude former names from the infobox, we might also want to exclude most former affiliations, under the same principle. Rublamb (talk) 03:59, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
- Yes. It's just that listing many former names within the infobox gets tedious. I therefore don't mind a bit of subjectivity here, per your comment. Jax MN (talk) 21:23, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
- If we were dealing only former names as a local, I would agree. However, it is not that simple. We are looking at groups such as National Speech and Debate Association which was called the National Forensic League from 1925 to 2013. Or the North American Interfraternity Conference, formerly the National Interfraternity Conference. Of course, we could specify what is or is not worthy of inclusion based on scope and longevity. There are also the now locals that were previously a chapter of a national; although that info can easily go in former affiliation. But if we are going to exclude former names from the infobox, we might also want to exclude most former affiliations, under the same principle. Rublamb (talk) 03:59, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
- Sounds good. Jax MN opinion?Naraht (talk) 02:49, 12 July 2025 (UTC)
Added
editFormer Name added.Naraht (talk) 11:53, 6 August 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks. I will work on fixing thosse Rublamb (talk) 15:52, 6 August 2025 (UTC)
- Shouldn't it be "Former name" rather than "Former Name"? Rublamb (talk) 21:38, 6 August 2025 (UTC)
- took care of most of them, I think, after I made the addition here.Naraht (talk) 23:14, 6 August 2025 (UTC)
Additional fields
editSomething else to consider adding as a field for Alumni_chapters. This seems to get inserted into Chapters as: 3 college, 4 alumni. Creating the field would be consistent with having the field for colonies. Rublamb (talk) 15:57, 7 July 2025 (UTC)
- Yeah, but I'm wondering whether the NPHC groups still have mixed.Naraht (talk) 20:27, 7 July 2025 (UTC)
- I know that one does, but they have different name for it (neither college/undergrad or alumni. Rublamb (talk) 20:51, 7 July 2025 (UTC)
- Any oddballs could be placed in a free field. Rublamb (talk) 05:50, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
Greek and Roman divinity
editShouldn't this be "deity" rather than "divinity"? Rublamb (talk) 06:45, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, if one cares about proper English. Good catch. Jax MN (talk) 21:21, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
- Updated. One other thought. If we merge Patron Greek Deity and Patron Roman Deity into Patron Deity, this field could also be used the group that has an Egyptian deity, etc. Since there will be a link to the article about the god or goddess, its origin will be accessible. Rublamb (talk) 05:49, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
- I agree with this change, too. But you got me thinking about something Naraht brought up a couple of years ago. What about non-divine patrons, like Ben Franklin, Churchill or others? There are a few of those rattling around. Ought these simply be "patron"?" Do we need to distinguish between a divine or secular patron? Jax MN (talk) 21:48, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
- I remember that conversation. I was and still am in favor of a generic Patron category, given how few there are in each category. I can't remember why we didn't merge them at the time. Patron, meaning "person chosen, named, or honored as a special guardian, protector, or supporter" should work for all types, whether deities, saints, or random people. Rublamb (talk) 22:05, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
- I think I was the one pooposed to it. If we do have it, I'd suggest it be almost another free, with the title (or part of it) being able to be specified. The question is how comfortable are we with Fraternity A having
- Patron Poseidon
- Patron Benjamin Franklin
- Or do we need to have variety on the left side.Naraht (talk) 16:01, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
- I am good with just patron but I guess I don't understand how options would work. Rublamb (talk) 19:48, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
- patron_type = Greek diety, patron = Poseidon vs. patron_type = scientist, patron = Benjamin Franklin.Naraht (talk) 19:57, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
- I am good with just patron but I guess I don't understand how options would work. Rublamb (talk) 19:48, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
- I think I was the one pooposed to it. If we do have it, I'd suggest it be almost another free, with the title (or part of it) being able to be specified. The question is how comfortable are we with Fraternity A having
- I remember that conversation. I was and still am in favor of a generic Patron category, given how few there are in each category. I can't remember why we didn't merge them at the time. Patron, meaning "person chosen, named, or honored as a special guardian, protector, or supporter" should work for all types, whether deities, saints, or random people. Rublamb (talk) 22:05, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
- I agree with this change, too. But you got me thinking about something Naraht brought up a couple of years ago. What about non-divine patrons, like Ben Franklin, Churchill or others? There are a few of those rattling around. Ought these simply be "patron"?" Do we need to distinguish between a divine or secular patron? Jax MN (talk) 21:48, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
- Updated. One other thought. If we merge Patron Greek Deity and Patron Roman Deity into Patron Deity, this field could also be used the group that has an Egyptian deity, etc. Since there will be a link to the article about the god or goddess, its origin will be accessible. Rublamb (talk) 05:49, 15 July 2025 (UTC)
template use expected on values?
editAre Founded (start date and age) and homepage (URL) the only values that a template is expected on the value?Naraht (talk) 13:10, 1 August 2025 (UTC)
- Once I get through it, any group with a foreign language motto will also have a template. I guess that does not fall under "expect" but may under frequently or commonly. Rublamb (talk) 19:51, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
- A motto of "Reach, throw, row, go" would be perfectly acceptable, but I agree, a good chunk would be template of some format.Naraht (talk) 19:58, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
Scope w/ Puerto Rico
editA group has chapters in
- A) 50 states/DC *and*
- B) Puerto Rico
Scope = National or Scope = North American?
(Currently running through the scope=International and making sure chapters aren't just within North America.)Naraht (talk) 15:53, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
- National. Puerto Rico is part of the United States, as are all of its territories. Rublamb (talk) 19:49, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
- OK. Some of the Puerto Rican fraternities and sororites may get interesting, but so be it.Naraht (talk) 19:59, 13 August 2025 (UTC)