Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zeta Sigma Phi

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. Mailer Diablo 16:06, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Zeta Sigma Phi

Non-notable sorority. (Founding date would be useful in determining notability, but is obviously false in the article) Tangotango 08:25, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

• Please go to the Zeta Sigma Phi Website to determine the founding date (which you say is obviously false). You can also Contact the University of Southern California's Office of Greek Life to discuss the founding of this sorority and the subsequent Multicultural Greek Council.

Please do you're research before you go tagging articles. . . —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tamarastern (talk • contribs) 09:04, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Sorority with no national presence. IMO, founding date is irrelevent because it falls below my threshold for organiations or clubs since it is comparable to a local chapter of a national sorority.--Isotope23 16:12, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

• The USC Chapter of Zeta Sigma Phi is the first chpater of the soon to be expanded organization. The sorority does have a national board. IMO you people should get a life or at least do some research. This sorority is very prominent on USC's campus, has been featured on MTV's "Sorority Life" and is in the process of expanding to other schools in the Southern California area. What is "a threshold for an organization or club?" An organization or club does not have to be a national organization to be a club. It is not a non entity at USC. It is the trademarked organization holding the name Zeta Sigma Phi. Again I question as to why the other non trademarked Zeta group's page was not deleted. I also question why two grown men care? Are you paying something to keep this page around on the interent? NO! Get a life outside of wikipedia and stop attacking pages that may be relevant to a group of people that doesn't include you're selves. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.125.89.11 (talk • contribs) 20:59, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

• If your argument is that this will someday be an important sorority in the future, thus this article should be kept now, I direct you to WP:NOT's crystal ball clause (and while you're at it you could try reading WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA). The only thing that matters is the relevance of Zeta Sigma Phi today. If it becomes a national sorority at some point in the future, then it would be wholly appropriate to add the national organization (though not individual chapters) at that time. As far as I'm concerned, a sorority (or fraternity... or any club for that matter) that is simply a local organization at one college does not have the appropriate level of relevance to merit an article on wikipedia unless there are some extinuating circumstances. You should also try making logical arguments as to the relevance of this organization. Telling people to "Get a life outside of wikipedia and stop attacking pages that may be relevant to a group of people that doesn't include you're selves" (sic) is strangely enough not persuading me to change my opinion.--Isotope23 20:02, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

To will- I didn't intend on deleting the "articles for deletion" section. Why aren't you in school anyway? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tamarastern (talk • contribs) 21:21, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

• This article should be deleted. Zeta Sigma Phi was founded at NYU years before this sorority was founded by stealing trademarked letters. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Stacylynnaustin (talk • contribs) 04:48, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

to Isotope23- I don't believe in changing peoples minds. You will believe in what you will want to believe. Very few people can be convinced otherwise. The fact that you don't have anything better to do outside this website is a sidenote. Zeta Sigma Phi is a national sorority, but It has only one chapter. The possibiliy of keeping the organization local to USC has been discussed, however the national board has never been dismantled. The national board deals with things outside the scope of the happenings of the group and is its own seperate entity. Again I urge you to do some research. You're whole argument is that Zeta is not a national sorority but it is which shows you are ignorant to the argument and therefore should not be commenting on it. You are refering to the lack of national presense as far as numbers of organizations across the country. What in you're esteemed opinion, constitutes the number of organizations a group must have before it deserves its bit of cyberspace? 15, 20? This is a usless argument. to Stacylynnaustin- Copyright you're Letters. If you're organizations letters were copyrighted, there wouldn't be another Zeta Sigma Phi. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tamarastern (talk • contribs) 06:03, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

• Something more than 1 chapter with 15-20 members. based on the criteria you want applied to your soriority pretty much any club on any college campus with over 10 members deserves a wikipedia article as long as they call themselves "national" and I simply disagree. Generally speaking, local chapters of national organizations get deleted. Saying that somehow a "national sorority" with one chapter is different than the local chapter of a national sorority is semantics. You can call yourself a "national sorority", but until you have an actual presence to back that up, you are "national" in name only. Feel free to disagree with me, but if you "don't believe in changing peoples minds" then it is sort of pointless to do so. On a side note, Stacylynnaustin's group did try to trademark their letters. I found that out when I did a little research before I opined deletion.--Isotope23 14:35, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

• Delete nonnotable. Mukadderat 17:48, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Zeta Sigma Phi is a national sorority. It has a national board with Almni and non alumni members completly seperate from the college group. I'm not just calling it a national sorority, it has an actual National board, something i'm guessing you're "research" didn't turn up. I don't see why National groups with limited individual chapters don't deserve a wikipedia page. You aren't paying for the service, so I don't see why you would be against it personally. . its not attacking anyone and its only non notable to you because you are a non sorority member in detroit. Further Stacylynnaustin's group didn't try hard enough to trademark the letters. They weren't trademarked for the almost 10 years before the USC group came into existance, leading our founders to believe they were a local non expanding chapter. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tamarastern (talk • contribs) 22:42, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

• • Tell you what- I've confered with some of my sisters and we have decided wikipedia is not a reliable enough source to argue over. It is not a encyclopedia you can quote as made obvious by that fact that a bunch of yahoo's with no connection or real knowledge of the group can edit the groups information- thus making it untrue information. I am removing the entry. Please do not repost it to continue you're discussion.

Tamarastern. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.125.67.141 (talk • contribs) 00:52, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

• Delete, worthless crap. incog 01:57, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

• Tamarastern/128.125.67.141, Wikipedia would be pretty reliable if people would actually follow the rules of citing sources and writing from a neutral point of view. Some articles have achieved this, so it's not entirely impossible for Wikipedia to be a reliable encyclopedic (i.e., secondary/tertiary) source. Also, you should bear in mind that it's generally not recommended that you write about yourself, or a group you are involved in, unless you can write from said neural point of view. And just because people who are not involved with a group can edit an article does not necessarily mean it will become inaccurate, or untrue - more often the problem is people inserting their own speculations and biases into the articles. Please note that you cannot delete this article as you are not the only author, and the article has a number of other edits. If you do want to have it deleted, please vote delete in this AfD discussion. Thank you. -- Tangotango 08:59, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.