This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Anti-Masonry article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This topic contains controversial issues, some of which have reached a consensus for approach and neutrality, and some of which may be disputed. Before making any potentially controversial changes to the article, please carefully read the discussion-page dialogue to see if the issue has been raised before, and ensure that your edit meets all of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please also ensure you use an accurate and concise edit summary. |
Are the state lottery and the casinos freemasonry or antimasonry related?
Question is meant seriously because I do not want to write nonsense in the Wiki. --82.207.238.157 (talk) 04:57, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
- Ok… I will answer in good faith… there is no connection between Freemasonry and Casinos, or between Freemasonry and the lottery.
- Nor am I aware of any significant antiMasonic sources that say there is some sort of connection. Oh, I suppose there could be someone out there who says it, but if so - they are fringe of the fringe… even by antiMasonic standards.
- In short… it’s nonsense. Blueboar (talk) 13:07, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
"Anti-Masonry/archive" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Anti-Masonry/archive and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 1#Anti-Masonry/archive until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 05:33, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
Neutrality
This article must handle its subject neutrally, and anti-Masonic individuals are known to been anonymously targeted and murdered by Freemasons as described by the article.
Thus I see no reason that the article itself should rely on sources that are pro-Freemasonry, as any such embedded information could compromise the online safety of Wikipedia editors operating within archival systems of Western governments.
Wikipedia deserves an Anti-Masonry article that is not compromised by the linguistic ranks of Freemasonry, and I expect to be protected from assassination by Freemasons as described in the article. Jellocube (talk) 00:56, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- poor argument--what are the reliable secondary sourcs you are using? Rjensen (talk) 01:25, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Factual inaccuracy
I find it ironic that Jellocube complains about the article containing factual inacuracies, and then immediately adds a factual inaccuracy. William Morgan was NOT a member of the Anti-Masonic party. That political party didn't exist until after his kidnapping, disappearance and (likely) murder. In fact, it was the "Morgan affair" that caused the formation of the party. I will also note that Morgan was never particularly anti-masonic. Yes, he wrote (and postumously published) an exposé of Masonic rituals... but that was done more as a way to make money (which he desperately needed) than any anti-Masonic sentiment on his part. Blueboar (talk) 00:20, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- B-Class Freemasonry articles
- Mid-importance Freemasonry articles
- WikiProject Freemasonry articles
- B-Class Conservatism articles
- Low-importance Conservatism articles
- WikiProject Conservatism articles
- B-Class politics articles
- Low-importance politics articles
- WikiProject Politics articles
- B-Class Discrimination articles
- Low-importance Discrimination articles
- WikiProject Discrimination articles
- B-Class Fraternities and Sororities articles
- Low-importance Fraternities and Sororities articles
- WikiProject Fraternities and Sororities articles
- Wikipedia controversial topics