Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a29f578ca9fc11f8

Jump to content

Talk:List of Delta Kappa Epsilon chapters

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 4 years ago by PhiAlpha3000 in topic Mish-mash of dates 1860 vs. 1861

Mish-mash of dates 1860 vs. 1861

[edit]

The 175th anniversary document shows Troy, Rutgers and Union chartering at various dates in 1860, the 1918 catalogue page IX shows various dates in 1861. The fact that they are in a different order is almost irrelevant.

  • Troy 175th: 3/2/1860 1918 cat:5/?/1861
  • Rutgers 175th: 12/15/1860 1918 cat:2/14/1861
  • Union 175th: 12/18/1860 1918 cat:2/?/1861

Ideas?Naraht (talk) 19:36, 28 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

The 175th isn't correct in all cases, but I would defer to it here as the more recent source. I sent a message to their HQ, Historian, to clarify. At the time, it was probably a rush for the exits, as students signed up to fight, and the final months of activity may have been on paper, only. Jax MN (talk) 20:04, 28 June 2022 (UTC)Reply
Yeah, the only place where I was really looking to match things up (and I'll need to go back and finish) is for any dates of inactivity and making sure that those are in the list, so that if (for example) the 1918 catalogue says that a chapter founded in 1850 has been inactive since 1896 and there are no new brothers in the Catalogue for that chapter since that close to that date, then the 1896 date should be listed in the dates of inactivity/reactivation.
BTW, I got a single response from the DKE historical brother that I saw after you had commented you had done so as well. I hope we haven't confused him, but let's hope he shows up here. This is *definitely* the type of page that a COI can be dealt with easily.Naraht (talk) 23:03, 28 June 2022 (UTC)Reply
I'm always happy to talk with a historical brother. He's been in the bonds a long time. Time wise he was in the same time GWB was in. PhiAlpha3000 (talk) 04:48, 29 June 2022 (UTC)Reply