Category talk:Freemasons of the United Grand Lodge of England

This category 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 articles

◆ WikiProject Freemasonry's "Top of the Trestleboard":

Improve to Featured Article status
Add content to stubs…
Check recently changed articles for possible improvement, to remove vandalism, etc.
Requests
[Watch this list]
- Articles for all United Grand Lodge of England-recognized Grand Lodges (if notable)
Participate in articles listed for deletion
Need images
New Article to be created

England

This category is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles

Inclusion criteria

Many of the people currently in this category are included based on dubious criteria and unreliable sources, often masonic websites with no indication of editorial oversight. For example:

Prince Albert Victor, Duke of Clarence and Avondal: The source doesn't mention whether Albert Victor was a member of the UGLE, and I see no indication of editorial oversight.
William Amherst, 3rd Earl Amherst: The source mentions various lodges he was a member of, but not the UGLE.
Ian Allan (publisher): Who's Who lists freemasonry as one of his recreations, doesn't mention any lodge.
Claude Auchinlek is included in a list of "famous freemasons". I see no indication that the source is reliable or that all those freemasons were members of the UGLE.

For very few of them is freemasonry a significant aspect, no more so than, say, religious affiliation or a membership in a sports club would be. We wouldn't categorize people by soccer club unless they're active players or club functionaries. Similarly, categorizing random people who happen to have been freemasons not just as freemasons but - often without evidence or with original synthesis - as members of a specific Grand Lodge doesn't seem appropriate to me. Only those whom reliable third-party sources connect to the United Grand Lodge of England should be categorized here. Huon (talk) 01:50, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]