User talk:Marc Kupper/Masonic Symbolism

What is the criteria for inclusion?

If this article is to be at all workable, it needs a clear criteria for inclusion. What defines "Masonic Symbolism"? What makes a particular bit of symbolism Masonic? Is "Masonic symbolism" any symbolism that is used by the Masons, or do we limit this to symbolism that is unique to Freemasonry? Do we include any symbol (or emblem) that is used by any Masonic body in the world, or only those that are common to most jurisdictions? Do we limit this to Craft Freemasonry, or do we include symbolism that are used by the appendant and concordant bodies? Do we include irregular and fringe Freemasonry?

We also need to define criteria for the meaning of the symbolism... Are we limiting this to the meanings as presented in Masonic ritual, or are we including meanings of the symbols as discussed by scholars (which may or may not be how Masons interpret the symbol). Blueboar (talk) 12:26, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A few weeks ago I had a good title in mind for this but now I can't remember what it was. "Symbols used within Freemasonry" is likely a better title.

The inclusion criteria are that the Masonic use and interpretation(s) of the symbol are notable.

The list is already long and so I was planning on excluding appendant and concordant bodies. However I would include irregular and fringe Freemasonry, keeping WP:UNDUE in mind, as there is no "official" Freemasonry.

The focus is Freemasonry and so interpretations documented would be those by Freemasons though there would be some compare/contrast if it makes sense for a symbol. --Marc Kupper|talk 06:13, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On Talk:Freemasonry#Not_expecting anything but why not? you had mentioned "Many of the symbols and emblems you list are fairly common to heraldry and iconography in general... I would not define them as being 'Masonic'." My thinking is to document symbols used by Freemasons where that use, and interpretation(s) are notable. I'll be changing the article title so that it'll be clearer. I initially chose "Masonic Symbolism" as it was short but we may end up with two articles. One on Masonic symbolism and another about the symbols used by Freemasons. --Marc Kupper|talk 07:38, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm moderately concerned about how notability per se is being communicated here. On the main article page the discussion suggests that notability is derived from documentary evidence, although there is no clear indication on how to test the veracity of that evidence. That was caveated with the point about independence, essentially authoritative sources are not independent of the subject, independent sources around ritual cannot be authoritative. On this page use within Freemasonry implies notability. I would avoid using WP:NNC as a support for inclusion until the article itself is fairly thorough; there is a risk that the article is flooded with non-notable content and we end up in a vicious circle of establishing notability by volume of text. That's something that's been quite common in this topic area over time.

I would be extremely concerned about any compare/ contrast effort as that is likely to be Original Research or dependent on unreliable, non-authoritative, sources.

I have some concerns about elements of the list already there. Before the list is populated I'd prefer to see some clarity around what the list is supposed to reflect; Freemasonry, Scottish Rite (which would make it a US-centric article), Bodies related to Freemasonry, fraternal bodies in general? The available evidence for use and interpretation varies according to which of those you want to consider.

ALR (talk) 08:23, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Symbols vs. Emblems

This is a pedantic point... but is worth noting. Please see: Emblem#Distinction: emblem and symbol. Technically most of the things on your list are emblems and not symbols. For example... correctly, the Beehive should be described as being an "emblem of industry" not a "symbol of industry". I know that in common usage, these two concepts overlap... but there is a distinction. Using one when you mean the other is a pet peeve of mine. Blueboar (talk) 15:20, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I had excluded "emblem" from the original article title to avoid needing to document the emblems for many Masonic groups. I lean towards the beehive as being a symbol of industry or being industrious and not an emblem of industry itself. The square and compass is an emblem for Freemasonry and so I separated that into sections for the two symbols. --Marc Kupper|talk 07:07, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please read the article I linked to above... You have the distinction between a symbol and an emblem backwards. The Square and compasses is a symbol for Freemasonry (ie when people see it they think "ah, Freemasonry") but they are emblems of morality and temperance. Blueboar (talk) 12:09, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

U.S.A centric

Blueboar, at Talk:Freemasonry#Not expecting anything but why not? you wrote

I will also note that your choice of what to include seems very U.S. centric. Several of the symbols you list are not used in other countries... And the rituals of other countries include symbols that are not used in the US.

That bias was not intentional. Please feel free to add notes on USA centric symbols and new sections for symbols not often used (or not at all) in the USA. Ideally, reliable sources get cited but if you don't one or handy then that's ok. I had run across some symbols where someone had commented that it was used or not used in the USA but the sources were not reliable and I ended up chosing to not include any comments.

FWIW - I tried to put the symbols in alphabetical order. --Marc Kupper|talk 07:19, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]