Freemasonry High‑importance

This article is part of WikiProject Freemasonry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Freemasonry articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to join us in our labors, please join the discussion and add your name to the list of participants. The "Top of the Trestleboard" section below can offer some ideas on where to start and what to do.FreemasonryWikipedia:WikiProject FreemasonryTemplate:WikiProject FreemasonryFreemasonry High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. ◆  WikiProject Freemasonry's "Top of the Trestleboard": Improve to Featured Article status Freemasonry Tracing board Isaac Newton University Lodge Societas Rosicruciana in Anglia Operative Masonry Primitive Scottish Rite Add content to stubs… Check recently changed articles for possible improvement, to remove vandalism, etc. Requests Articles for all United Grand Lodge of England-recognized Grand Lodges (if notable) Participate in articles listed for deletion Need images Scottish Rite York Rite Sovereign Grand Lodge of Malta New Article to be created Adonhiramite Rite Portuguese Rite Brazilian Rite Irish Rite Moorish Rite Rite Français Moderne Rétabli Articles to be re-written Freemasonry in Cuba - Entirely AI generated.

I have removed this one (again)... I am not finding reliable sources to support inclusion. All I can find is the RGLM's own website (which does not give an address for where the RGLM is headquartered, and seems primarily set up to sell a book), and one personal web-page (which simply contains a link back to the RGLM website).

What does this mean? It means we know that a website exists, but not that there is anything real behind that website. My recollection of the most recent consensus is that we require an actual brick and mortar building... or at least an actual street address... for a GL to be considered for inclusion. Blueboar (talk) 16:37, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Have to agree, although they appear to have produced a book. There is not even a hint of the other Grand Lodge being annoyed with them. Dropping the whole name into inverted commas, Google gave me 5 hits in English and 4 in Macedonian, and nothing on the ground. There are Grand Lodges with mailing addresses in parking lots who have done better. However, their venture into print probably means we shall hear more of them. Fiddlersmouth (talk) 17:12, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Self-Publishing a book does not mean much. Indeed, the fact that the book is advertized on the website makes me more suspicious, rather than less. Blueboar (talk) 19:04, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You can download it free if you read Macedonian. It's published through some sort of consultancy - so still no address. The bibliography appears to be gibberish. What I meant above was that the urge for self-publicity echoes the way that the RGLE and the Grand Lodge of All England tried to insinuate themselves into current masonry, our own articles included. We haven't heard the last of this one. Fiddlersmouth (talk) 23:55, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Blueboar. Please find street and all the legal data of RGLM on the Macedonian government website of IRS: http://ujp.gov.mk/mk/prebaruvanje_pravni_lica/prikazi?edb=4057009501963, or please paste РГЛМ into the search field. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Auroruszm (talk • contribs) 10:26, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Blueboar, here are some documents.

http://rglm.mk/docs/friendship%20and%20solidarity%20treaty.jpeg http://rglm.mk/docs/Manifesto%20World%20Masonic%20Christian%20Alliance.pdf Auroruszm (talk) 18:23, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Will that be enough for proving you existence of the Regular Grand Lodge of Macedonia for turning it back on the list?Auroruszm (talk) 18:26, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Auroruszm: Please understand, we need to apply the same standards to the RGL of Macedonia as we apply to other Grand Lodges. As I explained on your talk page, self-published references are obviously not admissible in proving the existence of a Grand Lodge, although we like to link to their website as a secondary reference. We have already deleted organisations that file tax returns, because we/they can't show the physical existence of any lodges. Most of these are defunct lodges whose few remaining members rent out the building. Some are speculative, they have set up phantom lodges in the hope of attracting members, and there is at least one bizarre Grand Lodge that seems to consist entirely of Grand Officers, with no evidence of members or lodges. We need evidence of ordinary masonic activity. This archived notice might explain further. Fiddlersmouth (talk) 23:53, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think photos/scans of hard-copy documents I provided to you show involvement of the third party which are NOT self-published, but they are given in hard-copy by the third party. Also they show real activities that are impossible for a small or non-existing or clandestine or fake lodge. As I understand you want to convince me that hard-copy material (published from third party) is not good enough and a link from another website is better reference. Auroruszm (talk) 01:18, 17 December 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Auroruszm (talk • contribs) 01:02, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

All of your links, apart from the tax registration document, start with rglm.mk/. That is, like it or not, self published. None of your lodges even register on a search engine. The address you sent to the Masonic Trowel seems to be a block of residential apartments. Can you see the problem? Fiddlersmouth (talk) 01:29, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay understood. Paper - not good, web link - good. It will take some time.Auroruszm (talk) 01:36, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't really a question of paper vs web link... it's the self-published nature of the papers or web link that is the issue. What we are looking for is independent confirmation that the body not only exists but actually operates as a Masonic Grand Lodge. Blueboar (talk) 17:59, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Will this independent link from the U.M.M.T. Convention be enough? http://mlnr1880.eu/eveniment/68Auroruszm (talk) 00:02, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Here is another independent link to video that confirms existence of the RGLM: https://www.privesc.eu/arhiva/55630/Conventul-de-iarna-organizat-de-Marea-Loja-Nationala-Romana-fondata-1880-si-UMMTAuroruszm (talk) 00:40, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well... it may be a step in the right direction... Watching the video, I was able to discover that UMMT is (in English) The "World Traditional Masonic Union"... and they too have a website (See here)... and that website says that RGLM is a member of U.M.M.T.

Unfortunately, the UMMT website has the same problem that the RGLM website does... it does not say where UMMT is headquartered... nor does it give an address for any of the bodies that (supposedly) constitute UMMT. Blueboar (talk) 16:14, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Blueboar, I cannot understand what do you mean if your intentions are of a good nature. UMMT is listed on your list. There are Grand Lodges that have UMMT as a reference. There are Grand Lodges on your list that have only The Masonic Trowel as a reference too as well as RGLM has, but you still make it an issue. I don't see where this is going if you have honest and good intentions. Please clarify.Auroruszm (talk) 17:26, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm now reasonably happy with UMMT, having tracked down the members. They pretty much practise under the auspices of Marea Lojă Naţională Română “1880”, who definitely exist. The only group I was dubious about was Gran Loggia Ausonia, but they've just been handed their paperwork back by a court in Sicily, who are satisfied that they are a legitimate Grand Lodge (even if they meet in a residential apartment). I think RGL Macedonia can go in using the 1880 ref. BTW, I still can't find them on the UMMT site. Fiddlersmouth (talk) 23:46, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Fiddlersmouth. Does that mean that I am able now to turn RGLM back on the list?Auroruszm (talk) 23:54, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

First, it would be polite to wait for Blueboar to reply. Fiddlersmouth (talk) 00:26, 26 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have lost track... do we or do we not have something that says UMMT recognizes RGL Macedonia? Blueboar (talk) 20:17, 26 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Blueboar, RGL of Macedonia is member of UMMT and together with five other members of UMMT, as listed on the independent link, is co-founder of WMCA (World Masonic Christian Alliance). Auroruszm (talk) 21:00, 26 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Blueboar, RGL of Macedonia has everything needed to be equal with everyone else on the list by Wikipedia criteria, it has full right to be on the list by any masonic criteria, and I don't see any reason in your actions and nothing noble in your further obstructions. I provided to you three independent links that confirm that RGL of Macedonia exists and operates as a Grand Lodge (as you requested), so please allow its inclusion in the list. Auroruszm (talk) 22:19, 26 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please be patient with me... I am almost convinced... I don't see RMLM mentioned on the UMMT website - so all I am looking for is something from them that does mention it. Blueboar (talk) 22:47, 26 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Blueboar, addition of RGL of Macedonia on the website of UMMT is a new condition you have, and maybe after that you will have again even a new one, which doesn't look so serious. I don't know when will UMMT add RGL of Macedonia on their website, and I don't think it should be a condition for what you already asked for previously, and what is a Wikipedia standard. If your suspicion is so tough, you are very welcome to come to Macedonia and visit RGL of Macedonia and see RGLM's work with your own eyes on RGL of Macedonia's cost.Auroruszm (talk) 23:16, 26 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rewind. We have a citation from Marea Lojă Naţională Română “1880” saying that they have signed a treaty of recognition with RGL Macedonia at the UMMT winter convention. We know MLNR 1880 exists from the whining of their rivals, and we can confirm the existence of the members of UMMT. It would (in my opinion) be petulant to claim that a masonic body invited to a UMMT convention didn't meet as masons. I think the MLNR 1880 citation is sufficient for the inclusion of the new Macedonian Grand Lodge. Fiddlersmouth (talk) 23:59, 26 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Fiddlersmouth, there is no response from the Blueboar for a three days. Does this mean RGLM can be listed? What should I do next? Auroruszm (talk) 14:16, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Blueboar, please allow inclusion of the RGL of Macedonia on the list.Auroruszm (talk) 23:34, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Fiddlersmouth.Auroruszm (talk) 23:37, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]