Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Masonic organizations


 * 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 of the debate was REDIRECT to freemasonry since there's no consensus to delete, it has been merged and a redirect is the simplest means of GFDLing it. -Splash talk 23:41, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

List of Masonic organizations

 * Delete. No content whatsoever: list of links. Contents have also been merged to, & so appear at, Freemasonry's page Grye 02:25, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge Complete the merge with Freemasonry, there is no point in retaining this page. -- (aeropagitica) [[Image:Flag_of_the_United_Kingdom.svg|25px|UK]] 02:33, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as per reasons above --Phanton 04:36, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Redirect per Guide to deletion to finish the merge and retain attribution of the info to the contributors of the list (and not just the one person who copy-pasted it into freemasonry). - Mgm|(talk) 11:29, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as merge has already occured.Gateman1997 20:02, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep and expand with short descriptions of these organizations. Listing on freemasonry page, which is already too long, is no help whatsoever. -- JJay 22:03, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Redirect, merging and deleting is not allowed under the GFDL. - ulayiti (talk)  22:19, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Eee... that's not 100% correct. There are a several options.  The simplest would be to copy paste the history into the talk of the target page, but that one's a bit of a grey area.  The next easiest would be for someone to validate all the information themselves and type it in themselves, which would have the added advantage of double checking WP:V and would be on solid ground.  The hardest would be a history merge which I have seen done before but don't know how difficult it is. -  brenneman (t) (c)  00:53, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Mostly correct though. You can't retain an edit history if it's been deleted. It needs to be retained in some form when merged and redirecting provides the least work as it doesn't involve admin intervention. - Mgm|(talk) 09:21, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I know it shows the history of the page, etc, & serves as reference should the page come back, etc. I do not see that talk page as increadibly valuable. A lot of the content of said page is mine, & I would not miss it. Grye 15:08, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
 * keep. this information is useful. although it might need some work. Kingturtle 06:06, 8 January 2006 (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.