User talk:Suntzu1963

Iota Phi Theta Fraternity, Inc.

While I appreciate and thank you for your concern in making sure that the Iota Phi Theta Fraternity, Inc. page is structurally sound, I ask that if you edit the page please do not remove information. You removed the "IOTA at a Glance" section and we want that section to remain. Please look at pages such as Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity Inc., Delta Sigma Theta, Phi Beta Sigma, Omega Psi Phi, and other NPHC organizations pages on wikipedia for a reference point on what information we would like to remain (all of the current information on our wikipedia page is relavant).

Thank you.

The at-a-glance section was removed as it was duplication of already listed information. Also, wikipedia articles don't have "at a glance" sections; instead, there's the introductory paragraph. As for the other removed paragraphs, they were copyright violations from other webpages. The frame around the picture was removed as its function was merely decorative, and it made the picture bigger without making it more informative.

Please keep in mind Wikipedia is not meant as an organisation website, and so articles won't (and shouldn't) have all the beautifications you'd expect to find there. Have a look at other articles (the featured articles are wonderful examples) to see what the article should ideally look like. --W(t) 00:29, 2005 May 28 (UTC)

Duplicate information:
- Please look at the other pages I listed for a basis for how the page was created.

Copyright
- What information violated the copyright? The information lasted is apart of the history of the Fraternity.

Frame
- The picture was changed as the version you created without the frame was not a choice version and has since been revised.

Wikipedia
- I thought that wikipedia allow persons to add relavant information about topics. Other related organizations (again see the articles listed above) also state the same basic structure. Please make edits to correct structure, but do not remove content unless you are sure that such edits do not remove proper and vital information.

Thank you. :Suntzu1963 00:43, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

From the talk page of the fraternity article:

Weyes, I do understand what you are saying about the copyright, but you must understand that as a member of the Fraternity, I do have the right to use information from the national website to accurately display historical information about the Fraternity on the internet. In your google search, I am sure that you have seen on numerous IOTA chapter websites hold the same information and that is done intentionally so as to display Fraternity-approved history (which is a directive from our protocol). If you have any further questions about this, please email me directly rather than continue this debate on the talk page. Again, I am a national officer and have received approval (by being a Grand Council member) to produce historical information about the Fraternity in proper settings. Wikipedia is one of those settings.

Furthermore, the information I just edited into the article is written by me. If proof is needed, I will only provide that to an admin. team member of wikipedia.

Thank you. :Suntzu1963 01:11, 29 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What exactly do you mean by an admin team member? Someone who is widely recognized as being responsible for the quality (accuracy, readability, legality, neutrality) of Wikipedia? Someone who has been granted access to the technical tools necessary to those ends? Someone in whom this community trusts, and on whom it relies, to make of Wikipedia an expansive, informative, professional, and usable reference work? Weyes is such a person. So am I. And so are you. That's the wiki way.

If, on the other hand, what you meant was one of the people who write the software and maintain the servers -- forget about it. As of this writing there are 604900 articles in the English Wikipedia alone, plus all of the user pages, indices, and meta-information about the project. The developers are few and far between, and could not personally handle these sorts of disputes for one percent of the encyclopedia if they worked at it full-time. Wikipedia is the largest encyclopedia on earth precisely because they have not attempted to do it themselves, but have devolved power.

Devolving power, however, means that posting on Wikipedia is a fraught act. It entails much more, in both letter and spirit, than 'I have free access to this webspace' and 'I know that what I am doing now is licit'. It means that you accept your trust to advance the purpose of Wikipedia, namely the creation of an outstanding reference encyclopedia. We have certain policies, guidelines, and customs because they help us make an impeccably usable reference. And inasmuch as this is Wikipedia and not the fraternity's website, we are going to have it done to Wikipedia standards.

Now, there's a very specific, overarching concern that arises whenever Wikipedia includes text that has been published anywhere else. I hope I'll be able to state it well, after clarify a couple of related matters. I hasten to point out that information is not subject to copyright. Information is facts, facts are ideas, and ideas are not the object of copyright law. The text which you have provided is an expression of ideas, and such an expression is under copyright implicitly from the first moment it was written, being owned by the author(s) (or, if done on commission, by the commissioning party). Meaning that some legal person (or persons) owns the rights to the text you are posting, and only that person (those persons) can license its copying, redistribution, or use as a basis for other works. And now let me refer you to the Copyright policy of Wikipedia. Do you have authority from your fraternity, not only to publish this text yourself, but to release it under the GNU Free Documentation License, which permits any member of the wikigoing public to copy it, redistribute it, and create derivative works from it? (Note that this necessarily entails that other parties may create non-approved versions!)

If you have not got that authority, you are putting Wikipedia at risk, and inasmuch as anyone (such as Weyes or myself) values Wikipedia, he or she has every right to ask for credentials. If you have got that authority, but feel you must create material not compatible with the community's understanding of what Wikipedia should contain and how it should appear, you must resign yourself to the fact that that community has the technical ability, the legal right, and the will to rework or remove all such material. And if, for whatever reason, you are unable to create or allow Wikipedia-style content about your fraternity here, we must part ways. Your contributions can be wiped

I hope this helps clear up why Weyes seems to be calling you out, and why working on an article here is such a 'fraught' act. And I hope you will stick around and contribute something informative, encyclopedic, and indisputably legal (and preferably in brilliant prose!) -- sorry it's taken so long, but welcome to Wikipedia! eritain 21:25, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

- Hear, hear. Don't worry, we were all new once (and "new" is relative), but if you take the advice of other users, you'll find you're considered to be an even better contributor. Rob Church 23:33, 9 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:3DShield.jpg

Image deletion warning

Image:3DShield.jpg has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. If you feel that this image should not be deleted, please go there to voice your opinion.

Image:Framedfounders.jpg

Image deletion warning

Image:Framedfounders.jpg has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. If you feel that this image should not be deleted, please go there to voice your opinion.

Page move

Iota Phi Theta Fraternity, Inc. is not lost, don't worry! I'm sorry this happened, you must have been horrified to see the article gone. I'll fix the situation, but it may take a while. We're going to need three pages, I think: one for each of the fraternities, plus one disambiguation page. Remind me never to try to clear out Category:Requested moves again. :-( Bishonen | talk 19:47, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Whew! Thank you so much for assisting me. It's not your fault (you were doing the right thing) and was a confusion that began with the change of the name from Iota Phi Theta Fraternity, Inc. to Iota Phi Theta (and the user that made that change was trying to make things uniform too so there's no blame there either). Please let me know what you need me to do and I will assist. Suntzu1963 15:00, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Whew indeed! I just finished the moving-around (I hope). I've put a note on Talk:Iota Phi Theta Fraternity, Inc. and Talk:Iota Phi Theta (John Carroll University), please check it out and see whether everything looks right to you. Best, Bishonen | talk 20:56, 31 December 2005 (UTC).[reply]

Looks good to me Bishonen! Thank you for your assistance. Happy New Year! Suntzu1963 16:08, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Iota userbox

see Category:Wikipedians in Iota Phi Theta Ccson 05:49, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fraternities and sororities

There is an article on fraternities and sororities and it has a section regarding pledging one of the NPHC organization. The info is incorrect and I'm not sure where they obtained this info. can you reveiw the text at Joining a black fraternity; then go to the talk page and provide your knowledge whether this is how NPHC member conduct pledge programs? Ccson 03:47, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]