Deletion of List of Masonic buildings

Comment: The complaints of the nomination seem easy to remedy by ordinary editing and so, per our |editing policy, are insufficient to warrant deletion
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Editing policy (WP:IMPERFECT)

Comment: I agree that this is already covered in the two other articles cited by the nominator, and I can't figure out why we need three such lists.  The entire Masonic Temple (disambiguation) page seems to have been created out of a serious misunderstanding of what a disambiguation page is supposed to be.  It's as if I wandered into town and asked, "Say, where's the Masonic temple?" and the reply was, "Oh, do you mean the one in Fairbanks, or the one in El Dorado, or the one in Pine Bluff, or the one in Kingman, or...".  I can see where this would be a legitimate spinoff of the article Masonic Temple, however.  As for the category, keep that one, some people prefer to look for their information by way of categories and should have the right to do so .  I'm sure that someone will say, "We don't need a list, we have a category", which to me is like saying, "You don't need to have a Masonic Temple, you can meet at the community center
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and navigation templates (WP:CLN)

Comment: as this list topic list appears to have not been published anywhere else other than Wikipedia, as it does not have a verifiable definition and contravenes the prohibition on original research as illustrated by . If it has not be been published anywhere else, and there is no evidence that it is verifiable, let alone notable list topic, then there is no rationale for inclusion. To demonstrate that this topic was not created based on editor's own whim, a verifiable definition is needed to provide external validation that this list complies with content policy
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not for things made up one day (WP:MADEUP)