User talk:Cluman
Welcome!
Hello, Cluman, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- Tutorial
- How to edit a page and How to develop articles
- How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! —C.Fred (talk) 17:55, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Re:Deletions to Pi Lambda Phi History[edit]
Greetings! The first, and greatest, problem with the text is that it is under copyright by Pi Lambda Phi. To use the text on Wikipedia, the fraternity would have to donate the text to Wikipedia—which would give any and all downstream users the ability to use the text without restriction, including commercial use.
The second concern is the tone of the article. There are passages such as "In 1928 we see that Pi Lambda Phi was living up to the expectations of the Founding Fathers" and "It is from this chapter that the current Pi Lambda Phi Fraternity developed-young, vibrant and energetic-into its current status among the great collegiate fraternities." The latter is an example of peacock terms; who or what defines a "great" college fraternity? (And what fraternity doesn't think of itself as great, but more on that in a moment.) The text would need to be edited to make sure it is written in the third person and from a neutral point of view and without unsubstantiated praises like "great." That said, if an interfraternity council report listed Pi Lambda Phi among the top ten fraternities by size, graduation rate, or some other quantifiable, that would be able to be included.
Speaking of neutral point of view, there is an issue in that you have a conflict of interest, as you are an officer of the national fraternity. As I noted above, the text is generally neutral. However, be prepared for other editors introducing material that is sourced and negative to the fraternity (e.g., if any scandals involving the fraternity had occurred). If the material is properly sourced and written from neutral point of view, it would need to remain, to give a full picture of the fraternity.
Normally I would talk about secondary source and the need to go beyond the fraternity for information, but I am both Greek and a realist. The most thorough documentation of the fraternity's history will be from historians connected with the fraternity, so I don't object to using the text, especially not as a source.
My recommendation would be to submit a text, edited down somewhat from what you submitted before and scrubbed of first-person and peacock phrasings. Indicate the source is the Guide for New Members, but don't repeat that guide word-for-word: by submitting text in your own words, it becomes your work that you can release under GFDL and CC without further steps. (To use the fraternity's text, a permissions request would have to be sent from the fraternity, donating the text.)
In closing, I agree that the history needs expanded, but it needs expanded in a way that complies with Wikipedia guidelines—all guidelines, but most chiefly the copyrights guideline. I'll be watching the article, and if you have any questions, feel free to ask me.
—C.Fred (talk) 17:55, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
August 2010[edit]
Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I've noticed that you have been adding your signature to some of your article contributions, such as the edit you made to Pi Lambda Phi. This is a simple mistake to make and is easy to correct. For future reference, the need to associate edits with users is taken care of by an article's edit history. Therefore, you should use your signature only when contributing to talk pages, the Village Pump, or other such discussion pages. For a better understanding of what distinguishes articles from these type of pages, please see What is an article?. Again, thank you for contributing, and enjoy your Wikipedia experience! Thank you. tedder (talk) 19:50, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:15, 24 November 2015 (UTC)