Deletion of General list of masonic Grand Lodges

Comment: I wouldn't classify it as "indiscriminate information". Right off the bat, it ''tries'' to keep out "clandestine" by ''at least attempting to use'' "descending from the United Grand Lodge of England". I would hope if you have access to a Grand Lodge-issued List of Recognized Lodges, you may consider Cite'ing it as a source. "unwieldy and useless"? No, I dont believe editors will let it remain unwieldy for long, I can forsee where breaking it into several 'country' related sub-Articles would solve any of thoes concerns. Who is considering it |useless??? I am willing to admit it does need work, the original :fr:Liste d'obédiences maçonniques|French version shows how much TLC work this article needs
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:USELESS)

Comment: As detailed by the nominator, this would be a HUGE and unweildy list if properly maintained.  More importantly, the list does not really discuss anything about the bodies that it lists... it simply lists them and includes a link to the webpage of the body in question.  To me, that makes this list nothing more than a link repository... which is contrary to 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)