Talk:Kappa Delta Rho

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Fraternities and Sororities WikiProject Kappa Delta Rho is part of the Fraternities and Sororities WikiProject, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Greek Life on the Wikipedia. This includes but is not limited to International social societies, local organizations, honor societies, and their members. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, visit the project page, where you can join the project, and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Large Changes 7/9/2007

All, KDR Tau #237 here. I just went through an extremely large update of the article, cleaning a few things up and re-organizing the Alumni section to be more reader-friendly. Like all of you, I'm very concerned about the founding text. Since National has almost no information to this topic available publically, I was forced to use what was written by George E. Shaw, '10 (Author of History of National - Mr. KDR) on the topic, which is available in hard copy at the Tau Chapter. It is *not* quoted from the Pathfinder, unless the two texts are the same.

I would like to see this article be in better shape in preperation for the active chapters' Fall Rush in September. Since obviously a majority of college students are net-friendly, it is more important than ever to keep the article in good shape. (National website however, that is another story.) Either way, since I made a huge chunk of changes, I wanted to leave a note and explain why I thought they were necessary and the sources in which they came from.

In Brotherhood, Nik Bonaddio, Tau 237

[edit] Older Discussion

[edit] Active/Dormant

I believe a section of dormant chapters, in addition to the chapters listed would be good, so they will not be forgotten.

[edit] Nicknames

K-Deltas? I've never heard that one before.

I am a member of the Pi Alpha Chapter of Kappa Delta Rho at the University of Toledo. I was just wondering why we got no mention...i believe we are up for some national awards this year...

[edit] Who wrote this article?

While it's cool that someone took the time to cut and paste propoganda from national, this article in no way resembles anything close to a neutral point of view. I don't think anybody really cares that much, but this whole article should be rewritten, w/o personal pronouns or perjorative statements (the fact that alpha went coed is just that: a fact. In an encyclopedia, there's no place for calling it groundbreaking or trailblazing.

PLEASE REWRITE THIS ARTICLE, AND DON'T JUST QUOTE THE PATHFINDER!!!

Chris kupka 22:48, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I'm the one responsible

I rewrote this article, I'm a brother of Eta at the University of Illinois, I've been meaning to rewrite it. I thought we got a raw deal when our article was such a short stub compared to other fraternities, so I temporarily copied the Pathfinder history into it from another chapter's website (I think it was Nu/Indiana). I'm going to rewrite the history to make it more neutral, as well as add in inactive chapters when I get some time. Also, for anybody who has more experience with this than me, how would I cite the Pathfinder as a source?

Glad to see you've got plans for revising. I stumbled on the page to correct a typo of "Virginia," and made the mistake of attempting to edit this monstrosity. I've edited entries that look like they were written by pre-teen girls, puerile pieces by juvenile delinquents, and articles by non-native English speakers, but this one beats them all for pitiful prose. I got from the beginning through "The Founders," and from "After 1946" to the end. The simplest way to note a reference is to create a new section called "References," and put it there. Do so ASAP even if you don't get to any other edits! Kyriosity 05:13, 2 January 2007 (UTC)


I'm from the Nu Chapter and you probably did copy & paste from our website. Alot of that information looks like it was from our website as I was one who helped design and build our site. All the history information we posted was compiled from National as well as The Pathfinder and another Alum, who as an Active, had written up quite a bit on KDR....I'm sort of thrilled to see we even had this info posted on Wikipedia, so just having that is a great start. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.212.0.104 (talk) 20:33, 14 January 2007 (UTC).
Just out of curiosity, does anybody know anyplace online, like a chapter website, that has more KDR history that just the chapter from the Pathfinder? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 130.126.128.200 (talk) 20:26, 21 January 2007 (UTC).
Beta Chapter alum, here. When you say "we got a raw deal," you understand that nobody deliberately short-changed our fraternity, right? Only what people take the time to add to Wikipedia will appear on Wikipedia. Since very few people besides brothers of KDR will care about KDR's place on Wikipedia, it falls to us - to you - to make the article not only thorough, but neutral and appropriate. Simply making it larger does nobody any favors, and I'm glad it has been cut back down in advance of more appropriate revision. Beeeej 07:30, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

DO NOT CITE THE PATHFINDER As I understand it that is supposed to be kept secret

There's nothing in the Pathfinder that's supposed to be secret. If there was, it wouldn't be given to pledges.

- It's OK to cite the Pathfinder - the book is printed publicly and distributed to non-members. That will take care of source citation. But when (if?) somebody does this again, please write in the third person, NPOV. Taking information directly from the Pathfinder is ok. When summer rolls around, I'll get around to this. Seems a pity there's no mention of the Credo, the Ratti Stone/Coat of Arms history, chapter service in World War II... 24.213.197.102 04:19, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Good idea; a good history and chronological section would add quite a bit to the article as a whole. Jmlk17 06:48, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Questionable

Usually when on claims a number of chapters, it is the number of active chapters. 75 Chapters is a large number for not even having that many, and not having nearly that many active chapters

I disagree with this. The number of chapters should refer to total, since after all, a brother with an inactive chapter is still a brother, correct? A chapter does not lose its place in history due to inactivity.

[edit] NPOV

Where exactly is the neutrality of the article in dispute? Is it just in the plagiarism aspect that was previously discussed or what? If there is no NPOV issue, then I will remove the tag soon. Jmlk17 23:23, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I removed the tag, since there seems to be no issue on the article page. Jmlk17 08:06, 22 April 2007 (UTC)