Talk:A.F.&A.M.

Merge?
I do not think that this page is going to be able to grow any further than the dictionary definition stub that it is... While it may be useful to explain what these initials stand for, I think it this could be achieved in a one line explanation at the main Freemasonry article. I therefor propose a merge and redirect to Freemasonry. Blueboar 16:20, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Support merge for reasons given by Blueboar. Bridgeplayer 16:36, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Freemasonry is already rather large, how about Masonic Lodge instead? Bryan Derksen 16:49, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Merging with eachother
It appears to be consensus, at least for the pro-mergers, that they be merged together''. The merge tags say to merge into Freemasonry, so basically that's a second merger.''
 * Grye 20:17, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Merging F.&A.M. & A.F.&A.M.
There's discussion on this subject in 3 different places: Talk:F.&A.M., Talk:A.F.&A.M., & Talk:Freemasonry. Isn't one of the points of a project page to have a singular place for discussion spanning multiple articles in the same project?

So, can we move this there: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Freemasonry?


 * Go ahead and merge them, it's fone with me.Jokerst44 23:24, 10 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Joker & all, I blobbed something here:Freemasonry. If that's OK, & we can think about adding & growing something in, say, Regular Masonic jurisdictions &/or in Masonic Lodge, can we speedydelete tag these two articles? Grye 02:28, 12 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I really think the blob in Freemasonry#History is all we need... but I have no objections to also having similar stuff at the other articles. Redirect rather than speedydelete? Blueboar 14:20, 12 April 2007 (UTC)