Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Grand Masters of the Grand Lodge of Scotland


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   keep. Cirt (talk) 07:16, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

List of Grand Masters of the Grand Lodge of Scotland

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

This is a non-notable list based on a trivial connection which is not the primary claim to fame. The organization is notable, but notability is not inherited by the organization's leader as a result. Those individuals on the list who are not red-linked are only blue-linked because of a position of nobility that makes them notable otherwise. Considering that there are hundreds of Grand Lodges with hundreds of Grand Masters (each!) in their histories, this jurisdiction is not unique, nor does this list serve a unique purpose. MSJapan (talk) 20:31, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep The involvement of prominent people in Masonic institutions is a recurring topic of interest in Britain and this list (featuring various aristocrats and monarchs) is a useful focus in that respect. AllyD (talk) 20:59, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - the fact that something may be "interesting" is not a criteria for inclusion in Wikipedia . For us to have an article on something (even a list article) the topic must be notable (as defined by our policies). So... to keep this article, we would need to establish that the office of Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Scotland is itself notable. The fact that many prominent aristocrats were elected to this office does not make the office notable... in the 18th and 19th centuries, aristocrats and other prominent people were routinely asked to be the head of all sorts of clubs and societies. Blueboar (talk) 16:18, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Anything that deserves a navigation template box probably deserves an article. There are plenty of notable Grand Masters apparently.Doc Quintana (talk) 18:24, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - What, the Freemasonry nav template? AFAIK, that's on every Freemasonry-related page because of injudicious decision-making on the part of the template creator.  It's not an indication of notability in the least.  In fact,  believe that there are certain articles where the template is the majority of the page. MSJapan (talk) 23:42, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget  04:28, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per Blueboar. Why don't we create spinoff articles for list of high school principles while we're at it?   JBsupreme (talk) 18:48, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Keep - the position itself is probably notable (and would definitely be so if Freemasonry were not a secretive activity). The sheer number of people on this list who are notable for other reasons is telling. - Richard Cavell (talk) 13:33, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep It is easy to source this and so I have added a citation to the article. Colonel Warden (talk) 19:35, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Keep : i don't see why this page should be deleted. if people have the time to look at this page (which they do) then is becomes apparent that it does indeed have a reason for being here and a reason for existing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.219.186.72 (talk) 17:25, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.