The Rose of Minden Lodge No.918 was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 18 June 2020 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Grand Lodge of British Freemasons in Germany. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Freemasonry High‑importance This article 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 High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. ◆  WikiProject Freemasonry's "Top of the Trestleboard": Improve to Featured Article status Freemasonry Tracing board Isaac Newton University Lodge Societas Rosicruciana in Anglia Operative Masonry Primitive Scottish Rite 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 Scottish Rite York Rite Sovereign Grand Lodge of Malta New Article to be created Adonhiramite Rite Portuguese Rite Brazilian Rite Irish Rite Moorish Rite Rite Français Moderne Rétabli Military history: Culture / British / European C‑class This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles C This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale. This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces: /  Military culture, traditions, and heraldry task force British military history task force European military history task force United Kingdom Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom 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.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. More information: /  An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article. Germany Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany 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.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article needs a map. Once the requested map is added, remove the |mapneeded= parameter from this template. An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

This article contains a translation of Grand Lodge of British Freemasons in Germany from de.wikipedia. ( 437446387 et seq.)

Google shows a number of websites with information about the subject. Please ensure that the sources used are independent. Best, Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 17:32, 10 May 2010 (UTC) reply

Coronatum Veritas' request that the article be deleted entirely might be a bit extreme. The subject is notable and its existence can be verified. A good start would be to replace the current references used the support the existence of the institution with independent references. Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 17:49, 10 May 2010 (UTC) reply

We are in a situation of impasse in this matter. Unfortunately there are no truly independent sources of information or third-party references which could or can be cited. There are histories of the GL-BFG which have been written, but these are all from those who are either within our own ranks or at one time hailed from them and none of these works have been published as such. John Kellas is one person who several years ago wrote a quite reasonable history which ostensibly could be referred to, but since he is one of the protagonists in the differing viewpoints which until recently were being bandied about in Wikipedia on this subject, neither he nor his history can be accepted as being independent or can claim to be unbiased third party reference material.

Even the United Grand Lodges of Germany (VGlvD) simply refer their association with the GL-BFG to the official web-site of the GL-BFG via a simple link, without in any way going into details of how the association began or was negotiated.

I wrote to the United Grand Lodge of England requesting their official stance on the GL-BFG, but have received no reply. I know they have eminent historians and chroniclers, but as far as I am aware none of these have ever tackled the subject. Therefore, any purported historical or otherwise referred to sources which from now on might in any way be cited or quoted from, must be verified as to their genuine authenticity and true independence

Coronatum Veritas ( talk) 12:41, 12 May 2010 (UTC) reply

I noticed that the de.wp version of this article had more information so I copied it in as noted in the page history and in the translated page template above. I translated this info and reorganized much of the page.-- Doug.^{( talk • contribs)} 22:51, 2 July 2011 (UTC) reply

I noticed the same page myself and had considered doing the same thing some time ago. However, I was a little concerned that this might rekindle a rather controversial discourse and therefore refrained. I'm glad someone has had the temerity to do so!

Coronatum Veritas ( talk) 13:21, 5 July 2011 (UTC) reply

I hope it's reasonably close to accurate, though as has been noted elsewhere, independent sources are not easy to come by. Although I certainly don't want to include original research, I also don't want to include unreferenced material that original research would indicate is false :-) ; so, anyone else can advise: are the sections on the ritual and the reported amicable relations with the Women Masons correct in your opinion, or should they be deleted pending references? I simply translated what I found as best as Google and I could do. ;) I think that the latter statement may be particularly problematic based on my very limited knowledge of these organizations. Actually, that part may have worked it's way in from the German article on the VGLvD.-- Doug.^{( talk • contribs)} 15:45, 5 July 2011 (UTC) reply

The United Grand Lodges of Germany (VGLvD) do recognise the existence of the Womens' Freemasonry movement, but it is misleading or rather an over-statement to suggest that the GL BFG has "amicable relations" with Women Masons. There are wives and partners of active masons within the GL BFG who are deeply involved with Womens' Freemasonry, but that is about as far as the "amicability" could reasonably be stretched. That said, it should be pointed out that as far as I can tell, there is certainly no animosity towards the movement nor any feelings of discontent. There might be one or two of the "old school" who might feel that women should still not be allowed to practise Freemasonry, but I have not come across anyone like that and I have been involved with the GL BFG for many years.

On a different matter, you might like to note that it is actually incorrect to say that the GL BFG also works the separate Masonic orders (e.g. Mark, Royal Arch Chapter). The Royal Arch Chapter now has its own separate Grand Chapter which works with the GL BFG. Also the orders such as Mark and Knights Templar (to name only a few) are separate orders and these also work with the GL BFG rather than that they are owned by it. However one should also clearly recognise that had the original setting up of British Freemasonry in Germany not taken place, then these other orders would never have existed at all.

Coronatum Veritas ( talk) 09:17, 6 July 2011 (UTC) reply

The Rose of Minden Lodge No.918 page was decide by vote to be ″Merged″ with this page and has been added to the Grand Lodge of British Freemasons in Germany#Constituent Lodges section. A redirect to this page has been placed on the location of the old page RoyCrockford ( talk) 06:19, 18 June 2020 (UTC) reply

Can this page be renamed to Grand Lodge of British Freemasonry in Germany as the Grand Lodge changed the word Freemasons in its title to Freemasonry in its title in May 2022

Thanks for assistance RoyCrockford ( talk) 07:56, 23 November 2022 (UTC) reply