Talk:Alpha Omicron Pi/Archive 1

Archive 1

Initial author's comment

What seems to be lost on a few of the people who have come to "edit" this page, is that I WROTE a lot of the information myself. And you decided to negate it. Read through the material and actually find out what isn't from another site before you delete it. What you're doing is exactly what Wiki ISN'T about. lizconno --Comment written prior to December, 2011

The page seems to have been improved since lizconno's writing, with the addition of references and after a minor tussle over use of an image which had unclear copyright. It can, of course, still be expanded. Liz, as I am sure you now know, other editors had deleted or edited your content because that writing was at least in part your own essay, and not a referenced summary of published, notated (and therefore quickly verifiable) source material. Your work may have been entirely accurate, but Wikipedia was set up to disallow non-cited facts. It's an issue that trips up new editors. Jax MN (talk) 14:26, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

File:Badgeofaoii.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Badgeofaoii.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests December 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 13:59, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

This is an awful article.

I'm a member of this sorority, but this article is terrible. There are no sources and before I edited it, it was in no way neutral. It is so terribly written. I wish I could nominate it for deletion. I'm proud of AOII, but this is terrible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.146.5.168 (talk) 05:30, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

A number of edits have been made since this review -- "terrible" -- was given, and therefore hope that the article is now more useful.Jax MN (talk) 14:28, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Alpha Omicron Pi. 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/20110927014840/http://www.alphaomicronpi.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Search&section=Summer_2008&template=%2FCM%2FContentDisplay.cfm&ContentFileID=3316 to http://www.alphaomicronpi.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Search&section=Summer_2008&template=%2FCM%2FContentDisplay.cfm&ContentFileID=3316
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070127130432/http://www.got-chalk.com/kupets/courtney/ to http://www.got-chalk.com/kupets/courtney/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060813053230/http://www.alphaomicronpi.ca/ to http://www.alphaomicronpi.ca/

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 19:39, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://web.archive.org/web/20041212015724/http://www.alphaomicronpi.org:80/Content/NavigationMenu/AboutAOII/Heritage/Symbols/default.htm. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:06, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Deleted "Controversies" section

An editor added a Controversies section, to shine a spotlight on a since-resolved issue reported at the Alabama chapter, occurring several years ago. I deleted it because in a summary article it unnecessary to give a local issue such weight, with almost as much text as the page itself. Here is the section, prior to deletion, for your review: Jax MN (talk) 18:05, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

Controversies

In 2013 and 2014, sorority women from multiple chapters at the University of Alabama – including Alpha Omicron Pi, Phi Mu, Kappa Delta, Pi Beta Phi, Delta Delta Delta, Alpha Gamma Delta, and Chi Omega – alleged that either active members or some of their alumnae had prevented them from offering membership to black candidates because of their race. Alpha Omicron Pi member Yardena Wolf stated that "We [the chapter] were told we do not take black girls, because it would be bad for our chapter—our reputation and our status." During later membership discussions, the collegiate members were divided, with many speaking against giving a bid to a black woman and the chapter eventually voted against it. Another chapter member, Katie Smith, stated "Our sorority has a culture of silence. We were to never speak about the fact that we didn't have any African-Americans." In the aftermath, Wolf stated the chapter became so hostile to her that she moved out of the chapter house. She and a woman from another sorority founded an organization for campus clubs to discuss ways to further integrate. Smith would later sponsor a student government resolution to integrate Greek life. Wolf and fellow students held a campus march to integrate greek life on campus, and following media and national outcry, the university held a second round of recruitment in hopes of offering membership to more women, including black women; Wolf and Smith's chapter offered membership to two black women.

Jax MN I can see that it holds undue weight compared to the rest of the article (recently gutted for being almost entirely copyvio) and can cut it down, but this was a controversy that involved multiple chapters and made national news for a while, with mentions in state news two years later, and criticism is just part of balance/WP:NPOV. Most of the sorority pages have at least a controversies section some incidents. See Featured Article Alpha Kappa Alpha history section with the two most recent subsections entirely focusing on resolved controversies. I'll cut it down, but I'm putting it back. originalmess^{how u doin that busta rhyme?} 00:14, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Originalmess This article is quite short, and while I appreciate your recent additions of several new paragraphs, still, this issue of an event (now resolved) of racial prejudice on the part of a few chapters on a single deep south campus is neither surprising nor does it tell a fair story about the vast majority of other chapters. It is certainly not indicative of the nature of race relations in 2018 within the broader sorority and fraternity system. It is neither a fair summarization of Alpha Omicron Pi nor does this describe the reality for the other sororities listed. Yes, a "controversies" section is present in several other Greek Wikipedia summary articles. But for the most part, unless there is evidence of systemic racism, or systemic hazing, or systemic sexual abuse, I do not agree with the inclusion of these sections.

I'll give you an example: As fraternity advocates, our hearts go out to anyone killed in a hazing incident. But all fraternities now provide aggressive training to stop hazing, and schools by and large have a zero tolerance policy as well. Chapters that haze are summarily ejected, often banned for life, with perpetrators jailed. Not only are parents of perpetrators sued, but the fraternities themselves are, and often assets are sold off with the resulting loss of millions of dollars and future viability. So does that become the story when it comes to hazing: today's vigorous responsiveness that attempts to stop the scourge of hazing within fraternities (and a lesser degree, in sororities)? Or ought each fraternity page grind through a list of hazing deaths, alerting readers to the names of all the guilty parties as if hazing still has some official sanction? Do you understand my point? The real story is that men's and women's groups (fraternities, bands, sports teams, the military, private schools, unions and workplaces generally) ALL have a history of hazing the new person, and because of the severity of the risks involved and society's welcome awareness of bullying and hazing issues, fraternities are making expansive efforts to finally stop this horrid practice.

You or another editor has added a similar paragraph to each of those other groups. For the reasons listed, I find this unnecessary and distorting because any organization may have incidents of bad behavior. These are essentially kids whom we are advising here, and subject to mistakes like those made by racist sisters (or rather, perhaps a few alumnae holdouts) in Alabama. But to highlight this issue as if it is systemic and rampant across all chapters is fundamentally wrong. Thus considering undue weight or balance I am deleting the section once again, and urge you to take up the conversation here on the talk page, as we seek broader consensus. Put it to a vote if you like. Other readers and editors? please weigh in. Jax MN (talk) 19:41, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

References