OK, let's discuss it, but not all at once.

We can assure you that the GLDF couldn't care less about the UGLE.  In fact they are not at all friendly towards the UGLE and nor id the GOdF.  Isepak from first hand knowledge and experience.  Do you think for one moment that the GLdF would be in amity with the Grand Lodge of All England if this was a concern for them?

Why should the opinions of one member of one minor Grand Lodge, The Grand Lodge of New York, prevail on Wikipedia to the exclusion of all others?  You and they are not the arbiters of Masonic regularity, and never will be.  Nor will the UGLE.  

Surely you know that difference between Masonic "recognition" and Masonic "regularity"?  I have not expressed a point of view at all.  All I have done is correct your false statement that we were "started by a small group of "disaffected" ex-UGLE Masons" which is simply not true.  Neither is it true that any of our members were former members of the RGLE.  Absolkutely NOT true at all.  What more can I say?  if you will stop being offensive to us and to the GLdF we can work together to put into place a proper history which incidentally excludes our lodge in Paris c.1718.  Tgis can be done excluding opinion but including historical evidence and fact.  That is my offer to you.  Peter Clatworthy.