Talk:Elizabeth Hall (New Blaine, Arkansas)

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Arkansas portal This article is supported by WikiProject Arkansas (assessed as Low-importance).

Freemasonry Low‑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

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

◆ 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

National Register of Historic Places Low‑importance

	National Register of Historic Places portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Register of Historic Places, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of U.S. historic sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places 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.National Register of Historic PlacesWikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesTemplate:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesNational Register of Historic Places articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Articles for creation

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted on 8 August 2013 by reviewer Northamerica1000 (talk · contribs).

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no objection. -- tariqabjotu 13:51, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Elizabeth Lodge 215 F & A M → Elizabeth Hall (New Blaine, Arkansas) – Article was moved to current title without discussion. Elizabeth Hall is the more accurate name for the building (it's what is used repeatedly in the text of the cited Arkansas Preservation article on the building). There is a cemetery next to it (and directly associated with it) that is known as the Elizabeth Hall Cemetery. While "Elizabeth Lodge 215, F & AM" is used in the NRHP listing (it gives "Elizabeth Hall" as an alternative)... that name is more accurately applied to the local Masonic chapter that meets in the building. Distinguishing between the two prevents potential confusion. Blueboar (talk) 22:38, 10 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Move it. I would be happy with "Elizabeth Hall (New Blaine, Arkansas)" but am open to other names too if they are used by other sources. The most important thing is to get rid of the current name, which is bafflingly unreadable, and which will never be expected - or searched for - by readers. I cannot fathom how any competent editor could choose such an awful title. bobrayner (talk) 19:40, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

built by prison labor?

First let me say that I think the article is overall fine, and while I would prefer it be located at the "Elizabeth Lodge 215 F & A M" name documented in the Arkansas website linked, i don't care terribly much and the "Elizabeth Hall" name is also okay (and yes it is also documented as valid, at that website).

But the recent edits are getting my attention anyhow. Possibly too-flowery language, like the just-added assertion that the building was built by the Masonic "brethren" of the lodge, seem unencyclopedic. And then i notice the source states that land and lumber was donated by Masonic members of the lodge, but about the construction, states: "Construction was carried out under the supervision of the New Blaine sheriff, E. N. Griffeth." Actually, I am guessing what that means is that the building was built by prison labor! Once it occurs to me, i am pretty sure that it what is meant, that the language used is "code" for explaining that. Think about Paul Newman and Cool Hand Luke. --do ncr am 16:29, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

FYI... "Brethren" is the term used by most fraternal orders (Masons, Elks, Odd Fellows, etc.) when referring to their members. I am not sure how it could be seen as "unencyclopedic"... Hell, the word Fraternity means Brotherhood in latin. If anything I would say it is overly encyclopedic (as opposed to the more prosaic term "Members").

As for the idea that the physical work might have been carried out by convict labor... an interesting possibility that we should explore further. However, we do need more than our own supposition to mention it in the article. I think your "reading between the lines" makes sense, but we would need to substantiate. Blueboar (talk) 18:16, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]