Talk:Comacine masters

message: This article needs verification or at least some source citations.  I have been studying the history of Freemasonry for many, many years and this is the first reference to something called 'Comacine masters' that I have ever come across.  It seems absolutely rediculous to say "according to the history of the Freemasons" when the vast majority (if not all) masonic histories do not even mention them. Blueboar 19:12, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Give me a few days.  I'll check my library, because I'm sure I've got a reference to it someplace (Mackey or Waite or somebody).  However, if there is no more verifiable info to be had than what's already there, I think we should AfD it.  Was anything locatable via Google that was of any use whatsoever? MSJapan 17:29, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope, nothing useful on Google.  Most of the hits either point to the Haywood and Craig essay at Pietre-Stones, or to articles that quote it.  However, let's give it some more time before submitting an AfD ... someone thought it was worthwhile to create an article about these so called masters, and I would like to give them a chance to respond before I do anything drastic.  If no one speaks up for keeping the article after a week or two, we can revisit the AfD issue.Blueboar 19:33, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I actually found a little bit more on google, at http://www.freemasons-freemasonry.com/comacine.html Yes, it is the Haywood article on Pietre-Stons, originally published in 1923 in The Builder, however, THAT article cites Leader Scott, as does http://www.linshaw.ca/omtp/vol8no10.html which is a transcription of something presented in 1909.  I believe the most interesting connection is the suggestion that the four crowned martyrs were the patron saints of the Comacine Masters.  IF they were, this leads to speculation as to why there is a Freemasonic Lodge named for them.  The article could be changed to reflect that some have suggested the Comacine Masters as the originators of Freemasonry, and list the counterpoints.  It is a theory that did exist, and has later been debunked.  Of course, at this time, there are also questions beginning to arise regarding the actual verfiable existence of the Lodges that supposedly met in 1717, as some are asserting that only two fo the Lodges can be proven to have existed.--Vidkun 16:18, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have started the AdF process.  Please add any comments at the AdF page. Blueboar 15:38, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations and Verification needed 

message: I'm writing the article altought english is not my first language, help is very appreciated :-)
I'd also like to delete all the freemasonry part because on freemasonry article is clearly stated that
 It is thought by many that Freemasonry cannot be a straightforward outgrowth of medieval guilds of stonemasons
Can I safely do it? --Melaen 17:49, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No. That "thought by many" nicely avoids any citation of the source of the comment (we will have to fix that), but true or not, the alleged connection is part of the interest in the Comacine Masters, and not to present it is POV. MSJapan 17:58, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Now that we are starting to get more information here, I have reconsidered having this as a candidate for AfD... It certainly seems that the Comacine Masters were a real, historical group and thus worthy of some sort of article.  I am still not convinced that they should be linked to the Freemasonry category, but that is another issue (not one that ties into the AfD issue.)  Since I was the one to place the AfD on the page... I will remove it. Blueboar 21:32, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Woops... I notice that Wikipedia does not want people to remove an AfD tag until officially looked at by the arbitrators.  That means I will NOT remove it after all (at least not until someone "in charge" tells me it is OK to do so).  Hopefully they will see that we have been working to improve the article and will deside to keep it. Blueboar 21:38, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Why not I Maestri Comacini as well?  and --157.157.159.168 (talk) 14:04, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  rewriting