Talk:Alpha Delta Phi/Archive 1

Archive 1

File:Adphilogo.jpg Nominated for Deletion

It apparently was deleted by someone, but the crest was added, and thus this appears to be an acceptable change. No record remains of what image had previously been uploaded for Adphilogo,jpg. It may indeed have been the same crest as visible now. Jax MN (talk) 15:40, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Alpha Delta Phi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080107100752/http://www.dartmouth.edu:80/~ifc/ad.html to http://www.dartmouth.edu/~ifc/ad.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:52, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Alpha Delta Phi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160826152136/http://www.alphadeltaphi.org/AboutUs/Chapters/tabid/59/agentType/View/ChapterID/12/Default.aspx to http://www.alphadeltaphi.org/AboutUs/Chapters/tabid/59/agentType/View/ChapterID/12/Default.aspx
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.dartmouth.edu/~ifc/ad.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:12, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Notable alumni section

I have deleted the notable alumni section, leaving only a hat-note leading to List of Alpha Delta Phi members. In addition to having no sources, the section was way too long in proportion to the list article, and having that much info split between two article is both confusing, and a hassle to maintain. I understand the appeal of listing a few 'highlights' in the main article, but there needs to be some source, or some other impartial way to decide who qualifies as being special enough for mention. Grayfell (talk) 01:10, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

That's fair, and consistent with other fraternal organizations. I do favor re-inserting the portrait of Founder Eells, for visual interest. I will do so, grabbing it from the deleted page code. Jax MN (talk) 02:33, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

If a good source can be found, another possibility is to expand the section as prose: "Notable membership of Alpha Delta Phi includes two United States Presidents, 8 supreme court justices..." and so on. Again, sources would be needed. Frat membership lists tend to get a lot of vanity edits and minor trivia tacked on to them, so it's nice to get these things off on the right foot. Grayfell (talk) 06:08, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Dartmouth Chapter

The Dartmouth Chapter of the fraternity is no longer active, according to the Fraternity website. It has become "Alpha Delta" an unaffiliated organization. Thus, it should not be included as a current chapter of the Alpha Delta Phi Fraternity. In point of fact, the Dartmouth chapter's charter was revoked, but since I cannot find conclusive proof online, I have not included this in the article. -138.16.57.132 (talk) 07:15, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Dartmouth chapter did not have their charter revoked. They surrendered it voluntarily to protect the international from litigation due to the movie Animal House which was based in large part on experiences of the author while a ADP member at Dartmouth. This is documented it the book about the movie but I don't have the link at the moment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.33.115.108 (talk) 19:29, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

The previous comment is incorrect. The Dartmouth chapter disaffiliated from national ADP in the late 1960s. The movie 'Animal House' was released in 1978. Although screenwriter Chris Miller was a member of national ADP, the movie had nothing to do with Dartmouth AD's disaffiliation. If Chris Miller wrote this point in his book, he fabricated it. Jrgilb (talk) 06:55, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

File:Samueleellsportrait.jpg was nominated for Deletion

A discussion occurred on Commons, and it was decided to keep it. I'm observing this three years after the fact, but it looks like a reasonable decision. Among Commons watchers, the matter appears closed. Jax MN (talk) 15:41, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Yale's Secret Societies

I'm seeing some discrepancies in the cited article that pertains to Yale's secret societies, principally the creation of Scroll and Key. Read each reference to Alpha Delta Phi and you'll see what I mean. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.151.57.2 (talk) 06:58, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Cornell Chapter's building

I favor keeping the two sentences added in early 2014 that reference Cornell's building. This is a really interesting historical fact, and adds useful information to support ADPhi's claim as one of the oldest and venerable of the national fraternities. Two editors went back and forth, adding it, deleting it, and adding it again. My vote is to keep the piece. I'd also suggest that someone from Cornell supply a good public domain photo of that building, again, for more visual interest. When this is all resolved, someone might delete my editor's comment directing people here. Jax MN (talk) 16:04, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Not quite. An IP added it, and I removed it, and then another editor put it back. Throwing out the term "edit war" in the article note seems like poisoning the well at this point. This is just WP:BRD. I don't think this is an especially significant reflection on the fraternity as a whole, but regardless, the bits sourced to 'Brobible' need to go, since that's not an WP:RS. The details of how many people founded the chapter are totally irrelevant, and only serve to add undue weight through bloat. It's value as trivia isn't the question. Adding puff like that needs reliable, non-primary sources to establish verifiability and due weight. Grayfell (talk) 00:59, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

I support your point that the number of founders of an individual chapter is bloat, and such detail should be left to that individual chapter's website to announce. Or the national website. While 'Brobible' – which I've not seen before – has a rather low-brow name, nevertheless the photos it has are interesting as an indication that some of the historic buildings among Greek houses are magnificent. As a non-controversial bit of information, their showing the photo and announcing its heritage may indeed be considered Reliable for this purpose. --Not many scholarly studies on the subject. Since many other fraternity and sorority WP articles show a couple of examples of their best houses, that courtesy should be extended to ADPhi's article, especially if they were to provide a public domain photo of the Cornell building. Whether it is the 'best' or simply one of the better ones, a similar photo to the one on Brobible would be interesting. Jax MN (talk) 02:41, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Not many scholarly studies on the subject? There are many, many reliable solid sources discussing both the history of fraternities, and architecture around college campuses. Brobible isn't one of them at all. If other frats have similar content, it should either be properly sourced, or removed as well. Regardless, that shouldn't be the deciding factor for this article (WP:OSE). We shouldn't be extending any courtesies towards a chapter of a frat unless it's backed up by sources, because Wikipedia isn't a platform for promotion, and that's all this is right now. Many chapters have stuff that they can be proud of, we need secondary RS to figure out what's worth mentioning, and what's fan-cruft. If there are any pretty photos that can be uploaded from commons, fine, but let's keep the details confined to what is verifiable, ideally from secondary sources. Grayfell (talk) 06:00, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Vanity Listings

Alpha Delt has many high achievers. You may be one of them. There may be valid reasons to add your own name here, but please ensure that a fair and impartial reader would also count your achievements – which surely are many – as worthy of being listed on this page.

You see, Wikipedia has rules regarding Notability, which preclude everyone from posting their bio and accomplishments. It's an encyclopedia, too, so the information here is meant to be a summary of OUTSIDE SOURCES of original research. NOT as a place to make a first announcement of a fact. The largely non-Alpha Delt editors that manage this are very aggressive about their role, and for newbies, it can be disheartening to have painstaking edits to a page dismissed and your entry deleted. It happened to me, the first few times. Believe me, it's not personal.

If you are unsure, I wish to suggest the following examples whereby we can self-administer a list of consistent criteria. If we want to change the criteria, that can be done by consensus, but we need to hash it out here on this "Talk" page, and not on the published web page itself.

• Athletics: Professional athletes and coaches, winners of collegiate honors, Olympic medalists and coaches, nationally ranked athletes.
• Business and Finance: CEOs, presidents, founders of significant public companies, of private companies employing more than 500 people or with annual revenue in excess of $100M. Leaders of nationally-known events or projects, VPs or SVPs of notability.
• Civic Leadership: Heads of significant international, national or state civic organizations. Freemasons, Shrine, Rotary, except for Alpha Delt itself.
• Clergy: Presidents of seminaries, well-known institutional chaplains or religious leaders.
• Education: Presidents or chancellors of accredited institutions, heads of educational associations, educators who've had collegiate buildings named in their honor.
• Entertainment and broadcasting: Members of SAG, AFTRA, AEA, ASCAP or independently cited actors and artists, heads of related national associations.
• Government and Military: Any president, VP, Supreme Court justice, elected governor or Congressional or national official. Also, Cabinet secretaries, ambassadors, NGO heads. For Military: General officers or higher, recipients of national honors (Congressional Medal of Honor, etc.)
• Law and Judiciary: Any Supreme Court justice, Federal judge, chief state justice, or Federal or state Attorneys General.
• Literature and Journalism: Publishers and editors of notable magazines and newspapers, published authors (via commercial publishing houses, not self-published), nationally syndicated columnists.
• Science and Engineering: Major patent holders, astronauts, inventors of significance.

If you wish to add a name, and it is in keeping with these guidelines, be sure to follow the syntax. Include the person's Wikilink article where possible (often a good indicator that they are "notable"), include the chapter name and class year, a concise summary of the accomplishment, and at least one reference.

Should a reader have questions, please leave a comment here or by clicking the name of a Wikipedia volunteer editor. Jax MN (talk) 13:11, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

First meeting date

October 29th, 1832 has been cited in a number of places as the date of Alpha Delta Phi's founders' first meeting, but it is not possible: Samuel Eells commenced in May of 1832, and we know that the first meeting was during his undergraduate years. We have few primary sources, but Memorial of Samuel Eells, 1873 would indicate that the group first met soon after the Kappa Alpha delegation failed to expand to Hamilton, in the fall of 1830. What is the source for the October 29, 1832 meeting date? --Geterpoldstein (talk) 20:40, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Above, do you mean "commenced," that is, began his college career, or do you mean "matriculated," that is, concluded. (note that this definition is wrong, as I note below) in May of 1832? The reference simply says Eells left college in 1832.Jax MN (talk) 20:31, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

For clarity, I should have said "graduated." At American universities, "commencement" and "graduation" are synonymous, while "matriculate" means "begin enrollment." --Geterpoldstein (talk) 20:40, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Good golly, that is embarrassing. I was indeed incorrect in the definition of the word Matriculated. ARRRGH! Thanks for addressing this. Jax MN (talk) 20:31, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

To be yet more specific: in October of 1832, Samuel Eells was already in Ohio, practicing law in Springfield (page 72 of the Memorial) --Geterpoldstein (talk) 20:39, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Austin Harrouff, FSU

Austin Harrouff, charged yesterday with murder while high on the synthetic drug Flakka, may have been a member of Alpha Delta Phi. Earlier today, an editor added this information to the Alpha Delta Phi page, along with a couple of news report links. Nevertheless, local news reports have shown him with an Alpha Delta Pi (Pi, not Phi) shirt on, which initially made me question his fraternity affiliation.

Was that a sorority's shirt he was wearing?

I've since seen several news reports similarly give him an Alpha Delta Phi affiliation, but as of this writing there is no confirmation on the FSU chapter's website, nor the national website. I reversed this editor's good-faith edit that added Harrouff's alleged crime to the page, but this certainly could be reversed if it is accurate. But, this begs the question...

This is an awful tragedy. That said, is it reasonable to link Harrouff and the tragedy with the fraternity? (I am not a member.) Even if news reports refer to him as a fraternity member, they could just as soon note that he is a former football player or former wrestler, or simply a weightlifter. I assume the fraternity didn't cause this attack. I don't think it is fair therefore to make this a highlight of the Alpha Delta Phi page without direct culpability on the part of the chapter. It is just as reasonable to assume, knowing what we know now, that Alpha Delta Phi's FSU chapter fights vigorously to teach their members not to use drugs, and in this case, those lessons may have fallen on deaf ears. We just don't know the facts. Jax MN (talk) 15:16, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

As I wrote to another editor, as horrific as this incident was, I don't think it reasonable to add it to the fraternity's page, because there is no indication it was their fault nor that they had anything to do with it. I have asked him to remove the item. ADPhi may indeed have been a buffer against such behavior, and in this case failed in spite of efforts to keep him from harm. Drug use may indeed be prevalent on the campus, and they may be used at the fraternity house (or dorm, or locker room, or off-campus house), but we just don't know this yet. Nor has this been alleged as a causal factor. Connecting the two at this time is, I think, salacious. I agree with the Executive Director, who was quoted saying that this matter had nothing to do with the fraternity.

While yes, he was a fraternity man, Mr. Harrouf may have been even more intensely a Roman Catholic. But we're not rushing to label him as "Crazed Catholic murders two, eats face." He was a wrestler, and a wanna-be football player for FSU.

Now, if the fraternity was at fault, I would be in line to add their culpability to the article. In matters of hazing, or proven sexual assault, I have included such details in references about specific chapters, or in some cases, in Controversy sections for a national fraternity. Here though, it seems like unnecessary piling on. Jax MN (talk) 13:55, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Deleting references to Society

Dozens of editors have contributed to this article over the last year and a half. A single anon editor 69.68.190.71 has just deleted all discussion of the Society. I am a member of the Fraternity (not the Society) but I think the discussion belongs here and should not be removed unless there is a clear consensus to do so. -- DS1953 ^talk 14:24, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

To delete our history is not wise and does nothing but ignore the past. I will spend time putting the society back into these pages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bbergson (talk • contribs) 10:16, 23 September 2007

I'm an alumnus of the Fraternity's WASH Chapter. Fundamentally, this article is about Alpha Delta Phi Fraternity. And, although I totally agree that we should not censor "our history," I also think that we should unquestionably limit the scope of this article to information about "our" (i.e., the Fraternity's) history. Furthermore, as the article correctly observes, Alpha Delta Phi Society became a separate and distinct entity after the Fraternity / Society Split in 1992. Thus, any discussion in this article about the Society after 1992 would not be memorializing the Fraternity's history, and would be beyond the scope of this article. (Indeed, it makes no more sense to include content about the Society after 1992 than it would make sense to include content in this article about Beta Theta Pi, Pi Beta Phi, or any other separate and distinct Greek-letter organization.) In light of that, I'd strongly recommend that we modify this article to [1] allude to the Fraternity / Society Split (which is indeed part of the Fraternity's history), [2] note that Alpha Delta Phi Society thereafter became a separate and distinct entity, [3] delete all post-1992 content about the Society, and [4] as a courtesy to the readers, perhaps include a link to a separate article about the Society. I hope you'll agree that this is a sensible and constructive suggestion. Bob Meyers, WASH '91 TuBob Shakur (talk) 17:15, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Another disinterested reader here from a different fraternity: The co-ed movement has ebbed and flowed, and my suggestion is to keep the section on the Society and welcome this part of Alpha Delt's history. ADPhi is a smaller, old national that would be harmed by aggressively distancing itself from the Society in the same way that families with in-fighting can sometimes break apart irreparably. As a 35-year veteran fraternity worker and historian, I have learned not to predict the future. Will Title IX eventually force more co-ed changes? Will the women in the Society opt to bail out, leaving the Society chapters to rejoin the Fraternity? The only thing I know for certain that will happen in the future is that things will change. Alpha Delt (and Kappa Delta Rho) may have stumbled onto a solution for managing through the co-ed dilemma for national fraternities. Let it ride, boys. If Society members take pride in wearing Alpha Delt's symbols, and the Fraternity's liability is protected, you should be fine. Besides, these WP entries can't be just "one side" of the debate. Jax MN (talk) 15:53, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

A separate, cross-linked article for the Alpha Delta Phi Society has been created. Jax MN (talk) 19:56, 7 December 2022 (UTC)