Talk:Kappa Alpha Order

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Fraternities and Sororities (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject iconKappa Alpha Order 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Laundry list of hazing[edit]

Hazing allegations need sources that clearly imply that there's some significance to the fraternity as a larger organization, not just an isolated occurrence. Using legal case documents is almost never enough by itself to establish this, as they are WP:PRIMARY sources. Likewise, brief mentions in student newspapers aren't really up-to-snuff. Regional-level news coverage seems like a good cut-off point, right? Grayfell (talk) 05:44, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

Obviously there is a contributor with an axe to grind against a small subset of Greek organizations. I'm just curious how some groups were allowed to remove the edits made by this user, while some pages are forced to maintain biased text. Grayfell reverted a change I made regarding UA in 2008-09 - where the article literally only has this to say regarding Kappa Alpha, "Kappa Alpha Order was suspended for 18 months after an investigation found the chapter hosted unregistered parties and created other safety concerns." The rest of that article referred to other Greek organizations, yet the KA page tells the story of "severely haz[ed] pledges" - which is in no way substantiated by the referring link. Should these events even be on the National Organization's page, since the national directors have, in every linked article of merit and depth, punished the offenders and the chapters by suspending the chapters and/or expelling the members involved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.13.67.21 (talk) 06:18, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

Uh huh. If it's "obvious" that I have an ax to grind, it's obvious that you're here to defend your frat and right great wrongs. Maybe instead of slinging judgments at each other and making assumptions about what's obvious, how about we discuss this civilly. That's not really a suggestion as much as a reminder of policy. Anyway, I agree that some of the incidents you removed don't belong, but the UA one seems debatable, considering that it was part of a larger issue with the school. The news report really is pretty flimsy on this, especially as connected to hazing, so I've again removed it.
As for the rest, if the national organization is coming out and saying something about an incident, doesn't that actually support that it's significant to the organization? If the frat is working hard to fight hazing, as supported by reliable independent sources, that should be included in the article. Few of the sources I've seen have been all that persuasive on that, but I'm willing to be proven wrong, if you've got examples supported by reliable sources. Grayfell (talk) 07:41, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

OK, let's be civil. First off, I was referencing Broadmoor, not Grayfell as having the axe to grind - Some of Broadmoor's postings regarding hazing clearly violates WP:NPOV, as they editorialized the UVa story using the biased terms, "several serious allegations of hazing and misconduct", when the most useful quote from the article says the suspension was to investigate, "colorable reports of hazing and misconduct," including excessive alcohol consumption and "other behavior that threatens the health, safety and well-being of ... students." - colorable does not equal 'several' nor 'serious'. I would also point out that the chapter was never formally suspended by the University, and the National Organization never suspended the chapter, as it has done in the past when the evidence supports it. How could this be a 'notable event' when there is nothing of note other than a suspension during an investigation - an investigation where no other actions were taken? I would think this should be removed from the page. Additionally, the 2015 lawsuit has claims that are not borne out by the linked articles. While it appears that injuries were sustained, neither article claims that they caused "his football career ending prematurely". The note on the 2011 incident that claims that the chapter was suspended "after the media receive reports of pledges being abused and adult female performers being hired for live sex shows" - the linked article says nothing about this. The article was regarding a lawsuit where the National Organization was trying to receive assets from a suspended chapter - but there was nothing about 'media reports' being the reason for a suspension.

So far, on this page alone Broadmoor has posted 9 separate 'notable hazing' incidents, as well as an allegation of "a plethora of hazing incidents, lawsuits, and chapter suspensions involving Kappa Alpha Order." 3 have already been removed as lacking substance, and I am arguing that at least 3 more have improperly editorialized content, as well as having the inflammatory allegation removed from the page. If I were trying to RGW, wouldn't I also try to remove the section on Accusations of Racial Insensitivity? I would just like to have some consistency across all Fraternity pages - if some groups are allowed to take off 'Notable Hazing Incidents' - as posted by Broadmoor, then why isn't Kappa Alpha Order allowed to do the same, or if there is such a laundry list of these incidents, why can't they be placed on another page and linked from the main page?

I've toned down some of the WP:EDITORIAL words. What other fraternity articles have had their hazing sections removed? If they are reliably sourced, they should not be removed without discussion, and I would like to know so I can restore them, or at least assess the sources. Otherwise, the problems of other frat articles are not all that relevant, since Wikipedia has an ambivalent attitude towards precedent.
I've expanded with an additional source to explain that the UVa thing was temporary. I've also corrected and expanded the Austin thing, which as you said was substantially different than was presented. If you have other sources clarifying these, that would be helpful. Grayfell (talk) 09:05, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Kappa Alpha Order. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

As of 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 {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:14, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Kappa Alpha Order. 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:

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

As of 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 {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • 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) 12:13, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Irrelevant Paragraph Removal[edit]

The paragraph below has no relation to the page and should be removed. Boomerbuzz (talk) 21:56, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

"Ku Klux Klan founder John Lester claimed that the Klan's initiation ritual was based on a popular collegiate fraternal order. [7] It has been speculated by Allen Trelease that "Kuklos Adelphon almost certainly provided the model" for the early Klan. [8] Kuklos Adelphon dissolved during the American Civil War."

I think I got lost on this and at the moment I agree. I will look at this again tomorrow. Doug Weller talk 22:51, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
It was always relevant and you should have known that. I've fixed it by reinstating versions of some of the text you added - but you'd misrepresented the text considerably. Doug Weller talk 19:33, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Again, this paragraph is not relevant to this page, it is misleading and defaming.Boomerbuzz (talk) 19:43, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

KA order > Accusations of racism[edit]

Last paragraph of section text as of 11/4/19 reads as follows:

"In 2019, the fraternity suspended three members of its University of Mississippi chapter after they posted a photo on an Instagram account showing them posing with guns next to a bullet-riddled sign memorializing Emmett Till, a 14-year-old African-American lynched in Mississippi in 1955.[27] The local U.S. Attorney said that the matter had been referred for further investigation to the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice.[27] The students withdraw from the university, but they are not charged with a hate crime.[28]"

Fn 28 links to the following: "White Supremacists Caught at Emmett Till Memorial Making Propaganda Film Jackson Free Press, Nov 2, 2019; retrieved Nov 3, 2019."

Comments:

1. Last sentence of paragraph is ungrammatical; presumably the verb should be "withdrew."

2. The article linked by fn 28 says nothing about either factual claim in the final sentence of the paragraph, the claim that (a) the students withdrew from Ole Miss or the one that (b) they have not been, seemingly implying that they will not be, charged. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.103.115.62 (talk) 18:07, 4 November 2019 (UTC)