Talk:Freemasonry
![]() | The good article status of this article is being reassessed by the community to determine whether the article meets the good article criteria. Please add comments to the reassessment page. Date: 02:31, 30 March 2025 (UTC) |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Freemasonry article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41Auto-archiving period: 3 months ![]() |
![]() | Freemasonry is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() | Freemasonry has been listed as one of the Philosophy and religion good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This topic contains controversial issues, some of which have reached a consensus for approach and neutrality, and some of which may be disputed. Before making any potentially controversial changes to the article, please carefully read the discussion-page dialogue to see if the issue has been raised before, and ensure that your edit meets all of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please also ensure you use an accurate and concise edit summary. |
Women’s Freemssonry
[edit]A recent edit added Women’s Freemasonry as a third branch or “recognition chain” in Freemasonry… however, my understanding was that these groups were already covered under “Continental”/“Liberal” Freemasonry. Is this not the case? Blueboar (talk) 12:43, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
- It's a difficult one to determine, while most woman freemasonry would fall under Liberal Freemasonry, some require a belief in God (Universal Co-Masonry and other), which would be incompatible with Liberal Freemasonry, also some Liberal Lodges do not allow women. So, I felt that the most respectful and objective way to present them was to have their own category, what do you think? HyperSite (talk) 03:27, 29 March 2025 (UTC)
Article review
[edit]It has been a while since this article has been reviewed, so I have taken a look at the article and noticed the following:
- There are uncited statements in the article.
- There is an "unreliable sources" orange banner at the top of "Islam and Freemasonry" section. Is this still valid?
Should this article go to WP:GAR? Z1720 (talk) 02:52, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
- This is a tricky topic to bring up at GAR… a LOT of material on Freemasonry comes from two types of sources: 1) Primary source material from insiders, 2) unreliable source material from opponents of Freemasonry. There isn’t much that would qualify as both independent and secondary material - ie what GAR is looking for. I am tempted to say: let’s make it accurate, and if that means we don’t get to GA or FA, so be it. Blueboar (talk) 16:47, 30 March 2025 (UTC)
GA Reassessment
[edit]- Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • • Most recent review
- Result pending
There are uncited statements in the article. There is an "unreliable sources" orange banner at the top of "Islam and Freemasonry" section. Is this still valid? Z1720 (talk) 02:31, 30 March 2025 (UTC)
- It’s tricky… The sources cited in that section are reliable as primary sources for verifying what Islamic critics of Freemasonry claim about the fraternity… they are not reliable as secondary sources for saying that these claims are in any way accurate. Blueboar (talk) 16:55, 30 March 2025 (UTC)
Nomenclature
[edit]Given some of the recent additions, I think we need to revisit a discussion that we had several years ago, and reach a (new?) consensus. The issue is what to call the two main traditions/factions within broader Freemasonry?
English language sources tend to reflect an Anglo/American perspective, and use “Regular” and “Continental” when discussing these two branches. Sources that stem from the Euro-sphere, however, tend to use “Liberal” and “Conservative” to describe the two branches. Both forms of nomenclature have neutrality problems.
Here on WP, we try to take a neutral position on all of this. But that presents a problem in determining which terms we should use. My own inclination is that we should use the terms that each branch uses when referring to themselves (so “Regular” and “Liberal”) and avoid the terms that each branch uses when referring to the other (so avoid “Continental”, and “Conservative”). But I am open to suggestions. Blueboar (talk) 16:38, 30 March 2025 (UTC)
- Good article reassessment nominees
- Wikipedia former featured articles
- Wikipedia good articles
- Philosophy and religion good articles
- Old requests for peer review
- Former good article nominees
- GA-Class level-4 vital articles
- Wikipedia level-4 vital articles in Philosophy and religion
- GA-Class vital articles in Philosophy and religion
- GA-Class Freemasonry articles
- Top-importance Freemasonry articles
- WikiProject Freemasonry articles
- GA-Class organization articles
- Unknown-importance organization articles
- WikiProject Organizations articles
- GA-Class Fraternities and Sororities articles
- High-importance Fraternities and Sororities articles
- WikiProject Fraternities and Sororities articles
- Wikipedia controversial topics