Talk:Friend to Friend Masonic Memorial

refstyle tag for article
I tagged the article with the "refstyle" cleanup tag, which Bedford removed, and which I will now restore. The issue I see is that the references are bare URLs and, as such, do not provide adequate acknowledgement of the sources. The article would be improved by replacing them with expanded references following guidance given at wp:Cite and other places.

In case other editors wonder, similar issues have been discussed between Bedford and me with respect to other articles. Specifically, Bedford opened a request for comments against me, which was dismissed. However, the refstyle tag is justified. doncram (talk) 17:24, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * No, it's not, because it was in bad faith.-- Bedford Pray  17:28, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't understand your point. What is in bad faith, with any relevance here?  If you mean that I should wp:AGF that your references are done well, I cannot do that.  They are not done well, they are bare URLs. doncram (talk) 17:36, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

other issues in article
I don't want to escalate any disagreement here, but perhaps others should be aware that there have been other issues about this article in association with its nomination at DYK. Noting the "refstyle" issue is just one, and i mean for it to be understood as a mild comment.

An issue not raised elsewhere, is whether a key claim in the article, that one man "gave the Masonic cry of distress" is supported as it is written. I believe that bare URLs obscure the quality of references. In this case, the quality of the references is low in terms of documenting that actually happened. Perhaps the claim would be better modified, along the lines of "it is said that ... gave the Masonic cry of distress". That could be more easily supported by a reference. However, in the references given, I see claims of the man giving a Masonic "sign", which suggests a hand signal, but I see no specific claim of giving a Masonic call of distress, which suggests a verbal statement. doncram (talk) 17:55, 25 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I've added it to the template. The referencing style, nor the image, affects its position at DYK. At worst, the image can be removed, and the referencing style can always be changed. Otherwise, it meets the DYK criteria. PeterSymonds (talk)  18:25, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Masonic cry of distress?
What on earth is this supposed to refer to? Sounds like urban legend to me. Definitely unsourced at best, and original research at worst. Can someone provide a definition? If not, it should be excised with extreme prejudice.139.48.25.61 (talk) 19:57, 25 July 2008 (UTC)


 * The Masonic sign referred to in the article is more accurately called the "Grand Hailing Sign of Distress of a Master Mason." It is taught to each Master Mason upon his obligation to that degree and that it is to be used only at times of dire need. Davidryoung (talk) 15:07, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

To be technically correct there ARE words which are supposed to accompany the Grand Hailing Sign; "Is there nobody to help the widow's son?". There is some possibility Armstead might have used those words, or a variation, but no firm evidence. Saxophobia (talk) 12:24, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Difference of facts
Under the page Lewis_Addison_Armistead, there is no information about a pocket watch being handed over and it says shot three times rather than two. Just something I noted and sadly I myself have no idea of which is right. -- Anonymous, 9 March 2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.160.125.113 (talk) 00:50, 9 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Yeah - 2023 and I note some serious issues with this article and even inconsistencies with the other Wikipedia page. Going to work on it. But this article still leaves much to be desired. Jjazz76 (talk) 01:20, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Rewording possible in text?
I was reading the text "... Built by the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania, it commemorates..." and question the text in that and "... The monument's sculptor was Ron Tunison of Cairo, New York..." as being written correctly.

Should the reading indicate "... "Created for" or "Sculpted for" the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania, it commemorates..." as the Grand Lodge may have installed it, but the sculptor created it.

It sounds like the information is conflicting.

--Allamericanbear (talk) 18:19, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Friends' Meeting
It states in the article that Hancock and Armistead met again after they were wounded. This is false. Neither of them ever saw each other at Gettysburg, their wounds were too severe.