Talk:Kappa Kappa Psi

Removal of Important Information

I reverted the page back to a previous version because central items about the fraternity were removed (such as the Five Purposes, creed, and mission statement -- pretty important!). Reason listed for that change was "WP: NOT a repository." This is inconsistent with the definiton of "repository" on the NOT page, where "repository" refers to "links, images, or media files." Please leave information central to the topic IN the article! Thanks! --PR

Prominent member list

The list of "prominent members" I put up was based 100% on the list supplied by the fraternity at [[1]]. Please use this talk page to justify any additions not on the fraternity's published list. I agree that Robert Smith is prominent, but can his membership be confirmed? And John Long needs to be justified as "prominent" as well as his membership confirmed. Thank you! Cmadler 14:20, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Again, please use the talk page to justify any additions to the list of prominent members; the original list here was based on that supplied by the fraternity (link above). Additions needing justification are: Robert W. Smith, Eddie Green, and Dave Chappelle. Thank you! Cmadler 11:39, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Rober Smith's membership was through Troy State University (Zeta Upsilon); former student and band director at that school[[2]], and an alumni of that chapter (which should be verifiable through the national headquarters).

Dave Chappelle is not a brother - Central State considered making him an honorary, but it did not happen and Stillwater has no record of his membership. [3] - DiegoTehMexican 20:41, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

serving college and university bands

I removed the words "United States" from the opening sentence of this article and the Tau Beta Sigma article because the organizations are not dedicated to serving "United States college and university bands" but simply "college and university bands"; in fact they both have an "International District". Even though there are no member chapters in this district, its existence makes it clear that the organizations do not intend to limit their scope to the US. The links are set to the portions of those articles that deal with the US 'meaning' of "college" and "university" because they have very different meanings in some other English-speaking nations. Cmadler 12:31, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Category:Kappa Kappa Psi Wikipedians

I created a category for Wikipedians who are members/alumni of Kappa Kappa Psi. To join, just add [[Category:Wikipedians in Kappa Kappa Psi]] to your User Page. Cmadler 01:48, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

KKΨ and TBΣ no longer share an alumni association

KKΨ's board of trustees decided to withdraw from the NAA on July 22, claiming that 'the NAA’s “current structure does not meet the needs of our alumni” and that Kappa Kappa Psi and Tau Beta Sigma “have different definitions of life members and their privileges”.' See here:Letter from NAA (PDF)

I really don't understand this move, and KKΨ hasn't explained themselves yet. I'm an brother at USC, and I'll see if Dr. O'Shields or Ken Corbett knows anything. - DiegoTehMexican 01:38, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

It's the same sort of BS that our National council has been pulling for a while. They've been pushing the organizations apart since TBS turned down an offer to merge the organizations, and to my knowledge they've never been up front with the active membership of the fraternity about it.

Quality: B Class

I rated this article as B-class. I think with a few improvements it could be submitted as a Good Article. Some specific areas that could be improved are:

• Replace lists with prose
• Inline citations throughout (In progress)
• Sources other than the Kappa Kappa Psi website (local newspaper/magazine articles, Podium, etc.). To be a really strong article, we need secondary sources; anything published by the fraternity is considered a primary source.
• More illustrations (photographs, charts, etc).

If you notice other areas needing improvement, list them here so we can all work on them! Cmadler 13:44, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, the only Fraternity/Sorority/Greek life article to reach Featured Article status is Alpha Phi Alpha (quite honestly one of the best Wikipedia articles I've seen, even among FA's). Take a look at that, and you may get some more ideas for how we can grow this article. Cmadler 13:52, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Chuck Norris authenticity?

Is he really a brother of KKPsi? I have heard this a lot, but I have never seen any verifiable proof of it. I tend to think this is more just a prank. Can anyone cite a recognized source? -- Johnny06man 00:22, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Several people have been discussing this on user pages. According to User:Fliry Vorru's research, Chuck Norris was initiated as an honorary member in Spring 2006 by Gamma (Washington State University). Fliry Vorru also says that Dave Chappelle was voted in by Central State, but the paperwork was never sent in and he was never actually initiated. I am inclinded to accept this, but Wikipedia demands a reliable published source. Most of the "prominent members" list was taken from the KKPsi website which can be considered such a source, but for individuals who, like Chuck Norris, are not on that list, another suitable source must be provided. Cmadler 15:57, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

There are pictures of his shingle(initation paper) in the facebook group. I'm not sure how to link them here or I would show them. Also KPsi's CFR has Chuck's picture and a copy of the Shingle on his desk if you go look at National Headquaters. 70.241.103.138 (talk) 08:31, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Just thought I'd come back here and drop a note that Chuck Norris is now listed on "prominent members" list on the Kappa Kappa Psi website. Also, I have email confirmation from NHQ, and I suspect the website will be updated shortly, that Barry Sanders was made an honorary member in 1995 by Delta Upsilon (Eastern Michigan University). cmadler (talk) 15:26, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

usage of crest on personal pages by members of fraternity

All members of Kappa Kappa Psi National Honorary band fraternity are part owners in this non-profit organization. Discussion welcome on this subject... Werecowmoo (talk) 20:15, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Alpha Epsilon Alpha?

Hi! I'm just a visitor and I had never heard of this fraternity. And I noticed that the emblem reads Alpha Epsilon Alpha, and there is no explanation about the discrepancy between the name KKPsi and this. The meaning of Alpha Epsilon Alpha is a fraternity secret that only brothers know, which is why its meaning is not disclosed here.

Prominent Members Section

As much as I'd love for all of us to add our band directors, certain faculty that have made an impact on our musical development, and other people we think should be on the list of prominent members, I feel that we should limit the people listed in the category to ones mentioned on the National website. The list of those who are "prominent" can be very subjective if we allow anyone who is a music educator to be on the list. How can we truly define "prominent"? I wish we could add to our list Chuck Norris, Bill Cosby, distinguished college and high school band directors, and so forth, but that opens the door for a plethora of others who could be considered "prominent" by any given individual. All that would leave us with is a very cluttered and lengthy list of people.

In summary, I feel that for simplicity and consistency's sake we should use the prominent members list provided by the National website and leave it at that. Thoughts? Fliry Vorru (talk) 00:29, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Noting the lack of commentary, I will assume a general indifference towards the previous suggestion and go through with the change. Please leave the prominent members section alone unless all (note: ALL) of the regular contributors to this page come to a consensus on criteria for who can be added beyond the list on the national website. Fliry Vorru (talk) 18:22, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your vigilance on this issue! I see several problems with adding prominent members other than those publicized by the fraternity:

• Verification of membership. For Wikipedia purposes, this should come from a reliable published source, such as a book or a newspaper or magazine article.
• Verification of "prominence". This is more problematic, because of its subjective nature.

I agree that until a consensus can be reached that addresses these issues (and, of course, doesn't violate any Wikipedia guidelines/policies such as WP:RS, etc., the list should be limited to the fraternities published list. Cmadler (talk) 19:48, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

"Organizational ties"

This section was readded because it was "well sourced an informative." While it is informative, the information about founders in Lambda Chi Alpha already existed in the new article as a sidenote to the prominent member Tozier Brown, past Grand High Alpha of Lambda Chi. Though three of the ten KKPsi founders were indeed brothers of Alpha Kappa Psi, that hasn't been sourced and has been marked as citation needed since November 2010; even so, I don't know how important it is to mention that fact since none of them were charter members of the OAMC chapter, unlike the situation with LXA. Finally, I did re-add Shannon's affiliation with Phi Mu Alpha Sinfonia as well as an excerpt from the joint statement, placing these in the membership section where Phi Mu Alpha Sinfonia was mentioned.

• The fact that five founders were brothers of LXA is interesting, but trivial; it is made less so given that a Grand High Alpha of LXA was also a brother of Kappa Kappa Psi and that an article in the Cross and Crescent featured those five founders of Kappa Kappa Psi.
• Though it is a fact that three brothers were also members of Alpha Kappa Psi, it's trivial to people who want information about this fraternity. Since there is no correlation as there is with LXA, I feel as though that information belongs, and rightly exists, in the List of Alpha Kappa Psi members article as their position as founders of this fraternity makes them prominent members of that one, but there is nothing about their membership in Alpha Kappa Psi that is relevant to this fraternity.
• The joint statements between ΚΚΨ, ΤΒΣ, ΣΑΙ, and ΦΜΑ are important but are addressed in the membership section, which I feel is a more appropriate place for information that more directly deals with membership than the history of the fraternity.

I fully expected sections of the original article to be readded, so these are my justifications for the changes made. I think that the entire Organizational ties section can be done away with since I feel as though that information is better portrayed elsewhere in the article, but that's not my place alone to decide. LazySofa (talk) 06:03, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm content with the changes you made. When I added the section back that information was not yet else-wear in the article. The information only needs to be there once. I will go ahead a nix the section. Nice update by the way. Grey Wanderer (talk) 14:37, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

2008 lawsuit

The information about the 2008 hazing lawsuit is properly sourced and relevant to the article. Please do not delete without discussion here.  :) Wikipelli ^Talk 00:01, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm concerned that they way the Theta Delta and Delta Iota hazing incidents puts undue weight on those specific incidents, which I am confident are not the only such hazing incidents. I suggest that we should re-work those two paragraphs plus the one about HazingPrevention.org to give a broader look at hazing and Kappa Kappa Psi. Otherwise, we run the risk of just having a list of various incidents (certainly, these are not the only hazing incidents of the last 11 1/2 years). cmadler (talk) 17:45, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

The reason the Theta Delta and Delta Iota incidents are included is because they both had significant coverage, especially DI. I am, like you, aware that these are not the only chapters that have been closed since 1919 due to hazing, but they are the only ones that had media attention, and are both in the section they are due to historical timing. I do not like that those two incidents dominate the Early 21st Century section and have been thinking of ways to balance it with positive coverage of events like the 90th anniversary celebrations. Perhaps a section on the fraternity's hazing policy and advocacy against hazing in bands could be added to National programs? Sycamore (talk) 20:39, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

After going carefully through the sources, I have some additional concerns about the presentation of the DI incident. I think it should be made clear that, although the allegations did come to light following Champion's death, his death appears to have been completely unrelated (and in fact, this source specifically says so). The link I just gave also makes it apparent that such hazing is a deeply embedded part of FAMU band culture, spanning the entire band, not just Kappa Kappa Psi, and I think that's an important point to make here. cmadler (talk) 15:08, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

DI was placed on hold immediately after Champion's death but before the 2010 hazing allegations came to light in January. I will add some clarification that Champion was not connected to Psi in any way and that their charter revocation was due to earlier and entirely unrelated hazing. I hesitate to add too much about the hazing culture at FAMU to this article because as you pointed out, it envelops the entire FAMU band and not just the fraternity. I am working on a separate article on Champion's death which would be a more appropriate place to address the hazing issues. Sycamore (talk) 16:05, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

An interesting aspect that I noticed in the incident report is that the 2010 hazing incident was reported to the FAMU police on 11/21/11. Because it was off campus, FAMU police said they would refer it to Tallahassee police, but apparently failed to do so, delaying the investigation by two months (Tallahassee police only became aware of the allegations on 1/20/12, from media reports) and ultimately putting it just beyond the two-year statute of limitations. cmadler (talk) 13:24, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Meaning???

One of the things that completely baffles those not familiar with American college arcana is the meaning of these mysterious Greek symbols. What (if anything) does kappa kappa psi, and for that matter all the other three (Greek) letter acronyms, stand for?

Baska436 (talk) 04:32, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

The meaning of Kappa Kappa Psi and Alpha Epsilon Alpha (to Kappa Kappa Psi, I don't know if there's another Greek organization named Alpha Epsilon Alpha) are secret and have importance and significance to members of Kappa Kappa Psi. The letters of other Greek organizations are generally also secret, and have their own meanings for their members. The letters usually stand for a Greek phrase or motto, like Phi Beta Kappa's name, which isn't a secret, and is "φιλοσοφια βιου κυβερνητης" (philosophia biou kybernētēs), meaning "Love of learning is the guide of life". Kappa Kappa Psi is a secret, however. Sycamore (talk) 04:40, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Shouldn't that be mentioned? At least briefly? CüRlyTüRkey^Talk_Contribs 06:23, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

A secret! Good lord, how childish! Kindergarten stuff. Baska436 (talk) 06:39, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

For some names of the organizations, some chose Greeks letters that came close to their English sounding names. For others, it is from concepts found in religion. My organization, Alpha Tau Omega, chose our name from the principle Alpha and Omega and Tau was picked because it represented Jesus. The story can be seen from http://www.ato.org/AlphaTauOmega/atohistory/HistoryTheATOStory.aspx. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 06:55, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Should wikipedia be complicit in these sorts of secrets? Furius (talk) 08:10, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

The issue is Reliable Sources. If a reliable source like the New York Times published that the AEA stood for Archo Epsida Abbibblebibblebibble, it would be quite reasonable to add it to the Wikipedia article. We certainly have had cases where information that members of a specific Greek Letter Organization have wanted kept private has been added to Wikipedia, the ones with Reliable Sources have been kept and those that do not have Reliable Sources have not.Naraht (talk) 11:47, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Note, I did not realize that Alpha Tau Omega's reasons for picking those letters was not private. While theoretically primary source rather than secondary, that information should be added. For a fraternity that significant, the article should be longer.Naraht (talk) 11:47, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Since it is my organization, I am trying to reduce my edits on it to comply with our COI policies (but trying to provide sources for the information, but a lot of the content I believe was taken from the ATO Webpage directly). User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 16:29, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Is there a reliable source that says that the meanings of ΚΚΨ and ΑΕΑ is a secret known only to members? If there is one, can this information be added to the article? — Kpalion^(talk) 18:04, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Primary source of course here, "The symbols of the badge have special meaning to the members of the Fraternity" from http://www.kkpsi.org/fraternitysymbols.asp

Does it mean it's a secret? — Kpalion^(talk) 18:40, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Generally yes, I did a quick google search for Secret and Private on the fraternity website and the only use of Secret that applied was in a chapter membership program about the ritual and no use of Private. So that's about as good as you're likely to get... Much more likely would be to get a general statement about the majority of fraternities and sororities from something like Baird's which would be suitable on a more general page about social fraternities.Naraht (talk) 20:44, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Well, then, could you please add this information to the article? I wouldn't like to mess with the article myself, as I have zero knowledge on the topic, but I believe that a featured article should explain the meaning of its subject's name, or at least explain that (and why) it is unknown. — Kpalion^(talk) 19:42, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Except it is *much* more general than KKPsi. An equivalent perhaps... Let's say there is an FA for a Subway Station in the Paris Metro. Let's say that the Paris Metro Stations are named based on the size of the station and the Pre-French Revolution section of the city that it is in. That information belongs on the general page for the Paris Metro, not on the page for each subway station. This obviously isn't exact, , but let me know whether the section Fraternities_and_sororities_in_North_America#Greek_letters says what you want to know. I think any expansion belongs there.Naraht (talk) 12:17, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

If you look at Kappa Kappa Psi's handbook for membership on their website (anyone can get this info) you will see that AEA isn't mentioned in it at all. (Except for in pictures of our crest and other regalia) the meaning of AEA and all other secrets of the fraternity (yes there are more secrets) were all passed down by word when you cross and become a brother. If you want to know all our secrets just join. The hardest part about joining is getting a bid. However, If you want to join the fraternity solely on learning our secrets you probably won't get a bid. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:30A:C085:DB10:C4F9:8904:B8EE:DCD4 (talk) 22:49, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

FA issues

The article is predominantly sourced to itself and lacks independent sources Bumbubookworm (talk) 12:51, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Bumbu, I accept that for GA of FA status the article should be reviewed. My own sense is that this is a good article, well sourced, and a solid improvement over the baseline of Greek Letter society articles. I have no affiliation and offer this as someone who works to improve these articles. You note a previous discussion over citations. I just reviewed each of the citations. Considering 80 references, here is what I found:

• 30 items - Self-referenced to the national website (allowable, as long as this fills in information otherwise in-part sourced independently)
• 4 items - to books and unimpeachable third party publications, such as Baird's Manual. Several used multiple times because of the quality of the reference.
• 2 items - to academic or discipline-centric journals
• 12 items - to independent news sources, some national, some reliable local news, some daily or weekly school newspapers
• 1 item - to an independent, printed magazine
• 4 items - citing back to local chapter websites hosted by colleges
• 9 items - citing the society's published magazine, stretching back ~100 years (the Podium or the Baton) (Self -referenced, but in context, reliable and more permanent than 'just' a website)
• 11 items - citing an article published by a college or university, but not a school newspaper
• 6 items - citing a personal website or another Greek organization's website
• 1 item - citing a governmental site.

My analysis is this: This page needs upkeep. Some of these references are unnecessary, and many are archived. It appears that zealous editing by detractors has focused on this particular group, while legions of other Wikipedia articles are ignored for any degree of citation policing. Smells like bad faith to me (not accusing you, Bumbu). Would that many of the Greek Letter organization articles have had this much effort put into them for historic detail and decent writing, we'd have a far better resource. I further surmise that the zealous sniping of this page has likely browned off many new editors, seeking to add useful content about a group they care about in good faith and who are learning to follow the rules about neutral content. My own concern is to support the growth of good new editors, and I am regularly an Inclusionist here, and not a Deletionist**. I find that the citations easily support a removal of the tag asking for more citations. If anything, many citations can be trimmed, or combined. I do not believe that any prior detractors have spent the time I have in reviewing these citations, at least in their current form. On this basis I am taking two actions: removing the unnecessary tag asking for MORE CITES, and adding a summary in the To Do tag on the Talk page, asking for someone who is familiar with this group to clean up, combine or otherwise improve the many citations here. I will leave the Class rating as is, as Bumbu is correct that an independent review process should occur (there is a group that does this). And I will respectfully sign off with kudos to the writers of this article who appear to have worked hard to learn the process and offer fine content in good faith. Jax MN (talk) 21:41, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

** As to "Inclusionism" versus "Deletionism", this is an old debate on WP. See Jason Scott Sadofsky's Notacon presentation on the "wasted effort" subject. I support Inclusionism, over Deletionism, which, if the Deletionist win would make Wikipedia less useful. I stand with others in noting that Deletionism is a hold-over philosophy, constrained by print-era thinking. "Deletionism" harms Wikipedia, by contributing to WP community disintegration, and decreasing the motivation of new authors and editors. Further, I don't see the point of aggressive deletion or sniping WITHOUT ATTEMPTING TO FIX ANYTHING OR OFFER SUGGESTIONS when, a) the society exists, b) it has good references, c) the article is readable and well-formed, d) a motivated group of editors is actively involved in improving stubs and articles as they improve, and e) this society is uncontroversial (compared to the flurry of self-promotional or silly articles created each day. See Wikipedia:Obscure does not mean not notable. (also Jax MN (talk) 21:41, 9 November 2021 (UTC))

References