Talk:Allied Masonic Degrees

Freemasonry Mid‑importance

This article is part of WikiProject Freemasonry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Freemasonry articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to join us in our labors, please join the discussion and add your name to the list of participants. The "Top of the Trestleboard" section below can offer some ideas on where to start and what to do.FreemasonryWikipedia:WikiProject FreemasonryTemplate:WikiProject FreemasonryFreemasonry articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

◆ WikiProject Freemasonry's "Top of the Trestleboard":

Improve to Featured Article status
Add content to stubs…
Check recently changed articles for possible improvement, to remove vandalism, etc.
Requests
[Watch this list]
- Articles for all United Grand Lodge of England-recognized Grand Lodges (if notable)
Participate in articles listed for deletion
Need images
New Article to be created

Good start[edit]

I think we need to find some official links, a logo, and add a history section. I think I can work on the latter part. MSJapan (talk) 16:22, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

America and England[edit]

Someone trying to make this article less US-centric has generalized American information to England, for which I have no basis. In America membership is by invitation to Royal Arch Masons, but is that also a requirement in England? I must mar the symmetry to avoid getting ahead of the facts. J S Ayer (talk) 23:10, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Grand Officers[edit]

No Masonic article contains this data, because it is too difficult to keep up-to-date, and generally, those individuals are not notable per WP standards. Even the English GMs are not notable as such; their notability is always through peerage. It is arguable that some jurisdictions are easy to maintain, and some are hard, but we need to apply rules consistently. For that reason, I have removed that information, but it has been returned to the article twice. MSJapan (talk) 00:40, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also note WP:BLPNAME, which likely applies in this case; the organizational information useful to the general reader does not suffer for the lack of personal information. MSJapan (talk) 01:14, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I have done some searching via google and cannot find sufficient refs per WP:PEOPLE to include this information. I've removed it again and it shouldn't be put back until some consensus is established. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 06:33, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I was searching Wikipedia for other references to grand masters and found on Grand Master (Masonic) a ref that the Prince Edward, Duke of Kent is Grand Master of England and Wales and I found this citation. Strange. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 16:41, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're going to have to explain what's strange. The UGLE GM is notable by peerage, not for being Grand Master - that's a footnote. He's also the nominal head, not the actual (meaning someone else runs the day-to-day operations). The GM pro tem doesn't have an article, as you may notice. MSJapan (talk) 16:48, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

His actual title is ProGM, the last one was notable, not only because he was Britain's richest Buddhist, and was involved with disputed silver family heirlooms, but he was also a nobleman, the current ProGM I believe is a Chartered Surveyor (so nothing exciting there then) Yummy Dunn (talk) 23:47, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, thanks for clearing that up. It look to me like we had conflicting information. I was missing the fact that this is the AMD and not the main lodge and they have separate grand masters. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 19:29, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]