Talk:Freemasonry/Archive 7

message: DO NOT EDIT OR POST REPLIES TO THIS PAGE. THIS PAGE IS AN ARCHIVE.
This archive page covers approximately the dates between 17 Oct 2005 and 5 Nov 2005.
Post replies to the main talk page, copying or summarizing the section you are replying to if necessary.
Please add new archivals to Talk:Freemasonry/Archive_8. (See Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page.) Thank you.--SarekOfVulcan 08:00, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

message: I'd like it to say somewhere in the article how you become a mason so that Lightbringer can apply to be rejected. -- Spinboy 22:24, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:NPA, please.--SarekOfVulcan 22:38, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

text: Well, it has membership requirements, talks about the degrees, and mentions the initiatory work. I'm not sure what more is encyclopedic.--SarekOfVulcan 23:46, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

text: I see where you're coming from, but this isn't a Freemasonry advocacy article. Besides, some jurisdictions allow members to recruit, some don't -- how do we cover everything? --SarekOfVulcan 00:07, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Very carefully. Talk about the pros and cons of each method and the arguments behind it. -- Spinboy 00:37, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds like a good topic for a supplementary page. Perhaps if you could take yourself away from deleting material from other contributors and filing false and harrassing complaints against Wikipedia Editors, you might have the time to share your research on this subject area.Lightbringer 02:12, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: You violated 3RR, you got blocked. Suck it up. -- Spinboy 02:35, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Exposing the byzantine duplicity of minds immersed in Freemasonry is just as gratifying, and illuminating... I'm certain Wikipedian's have learnt a great deal about Freemasonry, just by observing the thought processes of Freemason Editors here. The Tale of Briar Rabbit comes to mind.Lightbringer 10:20, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is Joining encyclopedic? 

message: "On articles with multiple Points of View, a link to sites dedicated to each, with a detailed explanation of each link. The number of links dedicated to one POV should not overwhelm the number dedicated to any other. One should attempt to add comments to these links informing the reader of what their POV is." This is the whole crux of the matter. You guys always cite the rules, so why don't follow them.--XDev 13:51, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia is not a links repository. -- Spinboy 16:26, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

text: Put the Anti-Mason links on the article about Anti-Freemasonry. I won't stop you from putting it there. -- Spinboy 16:39, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: "I won't stop you from putting it there." Done. Hope you stick by your word.--XDev 17:05, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm there defending your right to put it there. -- Spinboy 20:02, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  What should be linked to 

message: Hello douches, the section "Criticism, Persecution, and Prosecution" has a mispelling of the word "Membership". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.113.39.51 (talk • contribs) .
Thanks.  We'll fix it when the page is unlocked.  BTW, you misspelled "misspelled".  MSJapan 01:52, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: You always manage to put a smile on my face with your odd quips, MSJapan.  ;) Jachin 04:30, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spelling note 

message: I do understand that there is an arbitration case related to this article, but this is a wiki.  I've unprotected the article in the hope that some editors will be able to perform useful work on it.  Please apply on Requests for page protection, or to another administrator, if you think the article still needs to be protected. --Tony SidawayTalk 18:58, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Unprotected

message: I moved this here because it has no relevance whatsoever to the ritual and symbol section.  It's not really relevant to language outside Masonic circles, which I think means it has very little value as part of the article. MSJapan 04:07, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd like to see evidence that that started in Masonry, rather than being a common voting method that was also used there.--SarekOfVulcan 03:19, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Freemasonry in the language 

message: Can someone look at the History of Freemasonry article and see what's there that isn't here, and vice versa?  That seems to be the longest section  in the whole article, and if the material is duplicated elsewhere, it could stand to be summarized here.  MSJapan 21:01, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The Catholic Encyclopedia entry on Freemasonry has the most honest and comprehensive analysis on the History of Freemasonry versus the usual Dan Brown like dross that is spoon fed to a gullible public these days. Kick the Freemasonry habit, it is spiritually damaging, unchristian, unamerican, and very unscientific.24.68.243.40 11:23, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Please note that 24.68.243.40 can be tied exclusivly to User:Lightbringer (see here for details, which has also been placed at the IP's userpage). The editor Lightbringer is presently banned from editing the Wikipedia after breaking the temporary ban on him editing any articles relating to Freemasonry. WegianWarrior 11:37, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Another day another donut. My preference is Tim Hortons, and I believe you are buying.Lightbringer 11:52, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another way to shorten the article.... 

message: Could someone please report to the admins that the user utilising 24.68.243.40 (Aka: Lightbringer) is still posting on Freemasonry and it's discussion page even after arbitration was carried out against him?
Evidence lies in the fact that lightbringers entire user info was written by him through this IP address and even signed a comment made by this IP.
Jachin 11:40, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Evidently, the admins have allready blocked this IP for 24 hours. Nice and quick too. WegianWarrior 11:45, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It may not have occurred to you that I was not aware that I had been blocked from editing the Freemasonry page as I assumed when I saw the removal of the general page block on Oct. 30 it applied to everyone. Are you guys just interested in formenting more bad feelings here in an already difficult situation? Freemasonry has had it's critics and criticisms since it's inception, why should an Encyclopedia on the topic of Freemasonry, like Wikipedia, not include such criticisms or critics? Maybe the Pro-Masonry editors should chill out a little, this is really starting to get a little silly.Lightbringer 11:43, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Tsk, tsk, check out his talk page.  He started talking smack to an admin too, now he's banned for good and can't even edit his own talk page.  :/  What posesses a person to be so misguided? Jachin 04:07, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: 24.68.243.40/Lightbringer

message: Although the link Souls of Distortion is interesting and shares subject matter with some of the more esoteric topics in Freemasonry, this link has no direct connection to Freemasonry and should be removed.  I didn't want to preform the removal outright after the current onset of revision wars which have occured.  Please announce your position on this link and we will take action according to concensus. Chtirrell 23:21, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone else already deleted it. Doesn't seem to me to be particularly relevant. --SarekOfVulcan 23:40, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Link to Souls of Distortion