Talk:Iowa Masonic Library and Museum

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Changes to the article[edit]

Doncram has objected to changes in the article, with the statement that they are "unfriendly"... perhaps he would clarify that? Blueboar (talk) 16:59, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures[edit]

Several pictures are available for this building on commons.

--RifeIdeas Talk 14:19, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Great shots, Rife -- I particularly like pic3. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 14:44, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly I took these pictures in a hurry as the street this building is located is the one of the busiest in Cedar Rapids, especially on a workday. If/when this article's AfD is decided I will attempt better pictures on a Sunday when conditions are better. I could also try to get pictures of the inside (if they will permit it).
Off topic a bit I am new at taking pictures so please be tolerant with me, and any suggestions you have will be appreciated on my talk page. Anyone is free to improve any of the pictures I took as what happened with pic1 to pic1a. I can take other picture requests for the Linn County IA / Black Hawk County IA area, please place requests on my talk page.
--RifeIdeas Talk 17:26, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If you haven't yet downloaded GIMP, it's a wonderful addition to your digital photography toolkit. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:31, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Rife, Just want to add my thanks for your efforts. Blueboar (talk) 17:44, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Inscription[edit]

Do we really need to mention the bible passage inscribed on the facade of the building? I don't object to mentioning it, but it strikes me as being a somewhat trivial factoid. Blueboar (talk) 14:30, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd just as soon leave it -- it's a pretty prominent feature above the entrance. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 14:44, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No problem... as I said, I don't object to quoting it in the text... As an alternative, I was thinking that a close up picture (such as File:Grand Lodge of Iowa in Cedar Rapids IA pic4.JPG) might be a better way to impart the same information. Blueboar (talk) 15:54, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion results[edit]

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Grand_Lodge_of_Iowa_building#Grand_Lodge_of_Iowa_building was closed with these results: "The discussion determined that there was A consensus to KEEP plus the withdrawl of the proposal by Blueboar (talk) at 03:15, 1 April 2011 (UTC)." .....LanceBarber (talk) 07:16, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note... the Keep consensus (and my withdrawal) was for the current version article ... under its new title and focus.
Whoops... Lance's closure was apparently improper (as he had !voted), and has been reverted... I fully expect that it will be closed as a Keep... its just that someone who has not !voted should to do it (bureaucracy... go figure). Blueboar (talk) 14:09, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There were also two outstanding delete !votes, so it wasn't overwhelming enough for a WP:SNOW keep, either. AfDs used to run for 5 days. A couple of years back, it was changed to 7. 3 is definitely not enough to make sure of consensus.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 14:12, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK... it has been closed again. Blueboar (talk) 04:00, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

lede and topics of the article[edit]

I edited the lede to remove a long passage defending importance of the library which i had written, and which got moved up to the lede. That passage was written for a library section, to which i returned it. The passage had become: "The extensiveness and public access of the Masonic library is valuable. For example, Professor David Hackett of the University of Florida notes that "a fairly large...public collection of Prince Hall materials can be found at the Iowa Masonic Library in Cedar Rapids, Iowa."[5] Likewise, Stephen Kantrowitz of the University of Wisconsin-Madison historian notes "Substantial collections of published black Masonic proceedings (which appear in significant numbers only from the 1870s on), pamphlets, and other publications are available at Masonic libraries, including the National Heritage Museum (Lexington, Mass.), the Livingston Library (New York, N.Y.), and the Iowa Masonic Library (Cedar Falls)."[6]"). It's too long and detailed and too minor, to be in a lede. Okay? I think there's info about how to write a lede at wp:lede. --doncram 21:51, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also to be clear, so there are no weird accusations that i am trying to hide something, I reinstated mention in the lede of the building's dedication having been asserted to be one of the most important events in Iowa Masonic history. This is a matter of notability of the topic of the article, which is appropriate in the lede. The wording could be changed. However, the topic of the article, notwithstanding some Masonic editors comments otherwise in the AFD, can be about the combination of the building, library, and museums, and possibly also about the Grand Lodge of Iowa. The name of the article is now at "Iowa Masonic Library and Museum", which i believe is the name of the building. I dread long discussion in which some editors may argue the article cannot be about the building because they did not initially think the building was notable. The building is pretty obviously notable, either on its own or as part of the Grand Lodge of Iowa and the Masonic Library as institutions intertwined with the building. --doncram 22:54, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I actually preferred it the way it was before you reverted back to your preferred version. However, Lede sections are supposed to be short, so I will not re-revert back. That said, one thing that the AfD established was that the article topic is primarily about the LIBRARY and only secondarily about the building. The building should be mentioned, but it should not be the focus of the article. I have adjusted the lede accordingly. Blueboar (talk) 23:44, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

listing of subordinate lodges[edit]

Hi there! I'm new to editing Wikipedia, and I wanted to start out by adding in information pertaining to the Grand Lodge of Iowa, especially the list of subordinate lodges . I'm still going though making the list, and wanted to know if it is able to stay in the main body under the section for the Grand Lodge of Iowa until it has been decided to have its own page. I hope this makes sense, please let me know if i need to clarify more. Vivi t3ch (talk) 17:46, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Table for list of all Subordinate lodges of the Grand Lodge of Iowa[edit]

Hi! I had worked on getting info together in one easy to look at table on here for all of the lodges that have been within the Grand Lodge of Iowa. I don't understand why someone deleted it and I hadn't noticed until the other day when I was going to show it to a friend. If there are issues with the table, I would like help in making it look cleaner. As I had been stopped before on having the Grand Lodge of Iowa be it's own page on here, I'm forced to add the info that I do have to this bit at the end for now. Vivi t3ch (talk) 13:13, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It is actually inappropriate per WP:NOTDIRECTOY.Blueboar (talk) 23:54, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for some of the info. I also appreciate some of the conversation over at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Freemasonry. I was doing some looking, and I was curious if it might be acceptable to have a listing as its own page that can be linked to. I see that there is the ability for pages to be just lists. I felt that this information would be helpful, as it would show not only the active lodges like are on the Grand Lodge website, but also those lodges of days past that have turned in their charters for whatever reason. Obviously it's not a complete list as of yet, but I do wish to do the same for other Grand Lodges in the future. Vivi t3ch (talk) 19:32, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Iowa_Masonic_Library_and_Museum&oldid=1206017834"