Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Freemason businesses

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. It's almost pure listcruft -- certainly not worthy of inclusion. alphachimp 00:35, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Freemason businesses

Freemason businesses (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Unencyclopedic listcruft. One has nothing to do with the other. MSJapan 03:58, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletions. -- SkierRMH 08:36, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete As the nom noted, it is unclear what being a Freemason has to do with founding a business. If the list is kept, it is going to need clean-up. Many of the persons listed have no mention of their Freemason status in their articles and I'm not sure if external links on this article meet the requirements of WP:V. janejellyroll 04:15, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. In addition: listcruft, can never be complete, going to run into major trouble with VP:V and WP:OR if expanded. WegianWarrior 07:31, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - It definitely has problems with WP:ATT (which has relpaced WP:V and WP:OR) - There is not a single citation to show that these men were even Freemasons, much less that Freemasonry had some connection to their businesses. This comes across as a poor man's version of a conspiracy page. I think the intent is to imply that large corporations are in some way nefariously tied to Freemasonry (always a favorite with conspiracy fans), without actually saying what the connection is. At best, the info could be added to Freemason conspiracy theories , however it would need citations for that as well. Blueboar 18:45, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete because it is a directory, because the external links don't support the whole list, and don't qualify as reliable sources, because it is not encyclopedic. HowIBecameCivil 19:55, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Crufty trivia. WP:NOT an indiscriminate collection of information. Dragomiloff 02:29, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.