Content deleted Content added
208.81.184.4 (talk) →Elijah Abel: fixed link |
Archived several dead threads |
||
Line 70: | Line 70: | ||
</div> |
</div> |
||
|} |
|} |
||
==Style Revision== |
|||
The style guide stands in need of revision. As it is currently, it is very incorrect. Many other denominations that have broken off from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints through the years are being bundled into "Mormonism" and the "Latter-day Saints." Currently the tern Latter-day Saints refers to members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and "Mormonism" is a term that should describe a combinaton of doctrines, culture, and lifestyle, as it pertians to members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. According to the Associated Press Styleguide, “The term Mormon is not properly applied to the other ... churches that resulted from the split after [Joseph] Smith’s death.” Please refer to the official style guide for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (www.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/style-guide), and understand that the other denominations are not part of the Latter-day Saints, Mormonism, or The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Ibitor|Ibitor]] ([[User talk:Ibitor|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Ibitor|contribs]]) 19:30, 22 December 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:I agree with you that "Mormon" needs to be clarified. But Wikipedia doesn't exist to define things but to collect and organize information about a subject. There are several of the "break offs" that use the term "Mormon" for their membership, so we can't declare that this should be exclusively applied to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. However, I have made repeated attempts (without success) to get a definite list as to which denominations use the "Mormon" for their membership. |
|||
:However, I think that you have an incorrect concept about the difference between [[Latter Day Saint]] and Latter-day Saint. The former is used on Wikipedia (apparently derived from scholarly works) as an umbrella for all of the denominations that have descended from the church founded by [[Joseph Smith, Jr.]]. The later is used exclusively for members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. This is a clear distinction made by regular contributors. — [[User:Val42|Val42]] ([[User talk:Val42|talk]]) 22:21, 22 December 2007 (UTC) |
|||
==Latter Day Saint RfC open== |
|||
There's an RfC open at [[Talk:Lost Boys of Polygamy]]. They ask whether the article should exist, and if so whether the title is appropriate. [[User:Cool Hand Luke|Cool Hand]] ''[[User talk:Cool Hand Luke|Luke]]'' 23:35, 22 December 2007 (UTC) |
|||
== restorationists in the press == |
|||
interestingly I ran across this article today while reading the news on my centro. [http://www.aspentimes.com/article/20071222/ASPENWEEKLY/887123115 Aspen Times] refers to LDS as restorationists. <font color="#063">[[User talk:Trödel|Trödel]]</font> 23:38, 24 December 2007 (UTC) |
|||
==Books in the ''Book of Mormon''== |
|||
The [[Book of Omni]] doesn't have any references except to the ''[[Book of Mormon]]''. We should be able to find some other works to reference. This also applies to all of the other articles about books in the ''Book of Mormon'', except for [[First Book of Nephi]] and [[Third Nephi]] which have one each. We should be able to find plenty of additional material from LDS authors. Even some anti-Mormon writers have probably written things about these books. There should even be some from others not of these diametrically-opposed sides who have presented at LDS conferences. — [[User:Val42|Val42]] ([[User talk:Val42|talk]]) 01:20, 27 December 2007 (UTC) |
|||
== Using subpages of article talk pages to store information for templates == |
|||
Seeing no mention of the discussion at [[Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Transcluding article content from talk pages]], I'm posting a note here. There are a number of editors - myself included - who think it is absolutely incorrect to use subpages of article talk pages in the way that they appear to be used by this WikiProject; one editor has mentioned an interest in getting such pages deleted via MfD if they are not moved to template namespace. I think a planned migration would be in the best interests of everyone; I suggest further discussion be continued at the Village pump. -- <font style="font-family:Monotype Corsiva; font-size:15px;">[[User:John Broughton|John Broughton]] </font> [[User talk:John Broughton |(♫♫)]] 16:44, 30 December 2007 (UTC) |
|||
== [[Kent Derricott]] == |
|||
There currently is a [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kent Derricott|AfD for Kent Derricott]], an entertainer who is well know in Japan as a [[gaijin tarento]], who is also well known there for being 'Mormon' (one of the two "Kento-san" who learned Japanese while serving a mission in Japan, the other being [[Kent Gilbert]]). The article is just a stub, which naturally needs expanding, but not sure if the AfD is justified. -- [[Special:Contributions/208.81.184.4|208.81.184.4]] ([[User talk:208.81.184.4|talk]]) 00:39, 3 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Mitt Romney RfC == |
|||
There is currently a discussion regarding how much weight to give the subject's religious affiliation at [[Talk:Mitt Romney#Material regarding subject's religious affiliation]]. Any input is welcome. Thank you. [[User:John Carter|John Carter]] ([[User talk:John Carter|talk]]) 21:02, 11 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== [[Battlestar Galactica (1978 TV series)]] == |
|||
In the second paragraph of this article's introduction it reads: "The premise of the series takes themes from ''[[Chariots of the Gods]]'' and [[Mormon]] theology." Shouldn't this mean that we ought to include this article and also fit it into one of the LDS-related categories? __[[User:Meco|meco]] ([[User talk:Meco|talk]]) 01:08, 22 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
==[[Origin of the Book of Mormon]] and [[Linguistics and the Book of Mormon]]== |
|||
The editor [[User:Descartes1979|Descartes1979]] reverts 2 '''Theories in favour of Joseph Smith's own account'''. I think that this is anti-mormon bias because he wants to reduce the Theories which are in favour of Joseph Smith and at the same time lets the other theories stay on this article. Compare the versions of this article, my version is [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Origin_of_the_Book_of_Mormon&oldid=186623586#The_Book_of_Mormon_Challenge Origin of the Book of Mormon 1] and his version is [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Origin_of_the_Book_of_Mormon&oldid=186624291 Origin of the Book of Mormon 2] |
|||
at the same time he wants to revert nearly all linguistic forms in the [[Linguistics and the Book of Mormon]] article. Compare the versions of this article, my version is [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Linguistics_and_the_Book_of_Mormon&oldid=186623241 Linguistics and the Book of Mormon 1] and his version is [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Linguistics_and_the_Book_of_Mormon&oldid=186625103 Linguistics and the Book of Mormon 2]. I think that this is a very obvious example of '''anti-mormon bias'''.[[Special:Contributions/84.146.201.29|84.146.201.29]] ([[User talk:84.146.201.29|talk]]) 18:29, 24 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
* To the anon editor - several of us have been waiting patiently for constructive discussion on your edits at the talk pages of the articles you note. Please join us, we are willing to come to a consensus, but your edits have amounted to plagiarism, and revert warring. --[[User:Descartes1979|Descartes1979]] ([[User talk:Descartes1979|talk]]) 19:47, 24 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Gordon B. Hinckley == |
|||
With the recent death of [[Gordon B. Hinckley]], that page will need extra attention to combat the vandalism that often occurs on current events topics. Hopefully members of this project will be able to assist. -- [[Special:Contributions/63.224.135.113|63.224.135.113]] ([[User talk:63.224.135.113|talk]]) 04:13, 28 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Also there is a Wikinews article about the death (found [http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Gordon_B._Hinckley%2C_President_of_The_Church_of_Jesus_Christ_of_Latter_Day_Saints_Dies_at_Age_97 here]) that could use some looking-in on. -- [[Special:Contributions/63.224.135.113|63.224.135.113]] ([[User talk:63.224.135.113|talk]]) 04:46, 28 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Regarding project banner == |
|||
I have noted how several articles relevant to Christianity have only the banner of more focused projects, several Christianity banners, or no banners at all on the talk pages. This makes it rather difficult for the Christianity WikiProject to keep track of all articles, as well as potentially reducing the number of editors who might be willing to work on the article, if only the more focused banner is in place. If I were to adjust the existing {{tl|ChristianityWikiProject}} to include separate individual assessment information for each relevant Christianity project, and display the projects which deal with it, like perhaps the {{tl|WikiProject Australia}} does, would the members of this project object to having that banner ulimately used in place of this project's one? It might help reduce the banner clutter, as well. [[User:John Carter|John Carter]] ([[User talk:John Carter|talk]]) 18:16, 31 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Bible in Mormonism == |
|||
I've noticed that most of the articles on the [[Bible]] or books of the Bible say anything about the LDS view of the Bible. It's important that others know that we revere and study the Bible, especially after Elders Ballard and Nelson gave talks on the importance of the Bible these last two General Conferences. I think we should add a section to each of those articles explaining the LDS viewpoint. If necessary, we could also make a new article specifically about the LDS Bible. What do you think? Anyone want to help? -[[User:Tea and crumpets|Tea and crumpets]] <sup>([[User talk:Tea and crumpets|t]] [[Special:Contributions/Tea and crumpets|c]])</sup> 17:29, 1 February 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Hello Tea, it would seem a separate article on Bible (LDS) would not be helpful. The LDS bible is the same bible that exists for the rest of Christianity; there is no difference between the two. The LDS have a preference for the King James version, but that is as far as it goes. I would be happy to help, let me know where you are starting and I will assist as I can. --[[User:Storm Rider|Storm Rider]] [[User talk:Storm Rider|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 18:04, 1 February 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::The preference for the King James version by the LDS Church naturally only extends to the English language, and there are LDS specific chapter heading, footnotes, dictionaries, and indexes, especially notable in the latest version printed by the church. It might be an interesting article if someone described both that, as well as the history of usage/official adoption of various versions of the Bible, including in languages other than English, for the Latter Day Saint movement as a whole. -- [[Special:Contributions/208.81.184.4|208.81.184.4]] ([[User talk:208.81.184.4|talk]]) 01:43, 21 February 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::If, as you all indicated, there isn't a specific, different translation of most of the books of the Old and New Testament used by Mormons, then there probably wouldn't be any particularly obvious reason to include reference to the LDS in most of the articles about the Bible, barring specific unusual interpretations. It would help to know exactly which books of the Bible are included by the LDS. I'm guessing, based on the use of the King James, it's more or less the "Protestant" Bible? However, if any of you were to want to create a separate article on the use of the Bible by the LDS, I can't imagine anyone would object, provided there were the requisite reliable sources and enough content to justify a separate article, and I assume both of those factors can be easily met. [[User:John Carter|John Carter]] ([[User talk:John Carter|talk]]) 02:13, 21 February 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::The English version of the Bible published by the LDS church is a standard King James version with specialized footnotes which cross reference to the other LDS scriptures (D&C, Pearl of Great Price and Book of Mormon). In addition, there are included in the footnotes comparative verses from the "Joseph Smith translation," or "Inspired Version." These notes, however, do not impinge upon the primary King James text, which reads exactly like it would from any other non-LDS printed version of the King James Bible. All distinctive differences related to the main text are confined completely to the footnotes. In other languages, a standard (non-LDS) Bible is typically used. It would be of interest in some article to illustrate those unique aspects of the English language LDS printing of the Bible. [[User:Bochica|Bochica]] ([[User talk:Bochica|talk]]) 05:20, 21 February 2008 (UTC) |
|||
(newindent) Hello John, it is true that we use the KJV of the Bible; however the teaching on the Apocrypha may be interesting to you. Joseph Smith stated the following: |
|||
: Apocrypha. March 9, 1833—Having come to that portion of the ancient writings called the Apocrypha, I received the following revelation: |
|||
:# Verily, thus saith the Lord unto you concerning the Apocrypha—There are many things contained therein that are true, and it is mostly translated correctly; |
|||
:# There are many things contained therein that are not true, which are interpolations by the hands of men. |
|||
:# Verily, I say unto you, that it is not needful that the Apocrypha should be translated. |
|||
:# Therefore, whoso readeth it, let him understand, for the Spirit manifesteth truth; 5. And whoso is enlightened by the Spirit shall obtain benefit therefrom, |
|||
:# And whoso receiveth not by the Spirit, cannot be benefited. Therefore it is not needful that it should be translated. Amen. |
|||
:It is left to the individual member to study the Apocrypha or not. This is found in the History of the Church, Vol. 1, p. 322. --[[User:Storm Rider|Storm Rider]] [[User talk:Storm Rider|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 05:40, 21 February 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::I don't know how this applies to other languages, but at least in Portuguese, the [[:pt:Traduções da Bíblia em língua portuguesa#Tradução de João Ferreira de Almeida|João Ferreira de Almeida]] translation of the Bible is the "authorized" version used in Portuguese-speaking congregations (aka wards & branches). Since there have been several native Portuguese-speaking general authorities who have served as the Area President of the Brazil Area, this is pretty much official doctrine for the LDS Church, although I can't give an exact reference here. I did hear it directly from Helio Carmargo (the first Brazilian called as a Seventy), but that isn't a citeable reference. Interestingly enough, this edition of the Bible supposedly was based upon the KJV, and the Portuguese Wikipedia reference above lists the [[Textus Receptus]] bibical text as the basis of the translation... also used in the KJV. I don't know how much official emphasis upon the Textus Receptus has been given by the LDS Church, but that does seem to be a very common thread among other language editions of the Bible used by the LDS Church as well. Food for thought at least. |
|||
::One other interesting aspect of LDS acceptance of apocryphal writings should also be mentioned, so far as the LDS Church has a significantly expanded cannon above and beyond mainstream Christianity. One book in particular, [[Sefer haYashar (midrash)]] (allegedly the Book of Jasher), was referenced by Joseph Smith (this is in the article) and has found its way into LDS theology in a number of ways. More could be said about this topic as well in an LDS context, but I wouldn't push it too hard. --[[User:Robert Horning|Robert Horning]] ([[User talk:Robert Horning|talk]]) 09:39, 21 February 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== [[Laie Hawaii Temple]] == |
|||
Peer review request found [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Latter_Day_Saint_movement/Peer_review/Laie_Hawaii_Temple|here]]. Please help. Thanks. —[[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] | [[User talk:Viriditas|Talk]] 03:47, 4 February 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== [[Book of Mormon]] == |
|||
This article's quality is deteriorating drastically. Large sections have been removed, the lead is terrible now. This article just needs help from people who know what they're doing. I'm beginning to wonder if this project ''has'' anyone who knows how to do anything other than argue about POV issues! Referencing and layout too often seem to be thrown out the window in the name of the all-powerful POV. The fact is, 90% of your POV problems would be solved if you actually cited your sources half as religiously as you argue over POV! [[User:Wrad|Wrad]] ([[User talk:Wrad|talk]]) 20:19, 8 February 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Dedicating a country? == |
|||
The article on [[Dieter F. Uchtdorf]] contains the following line: "On May 12, 2006 Uchtdorf dedicated Slovakia for the preaching of the gospel." This has a very odd ring to it, at least to my ears. Can we rephrase this, or put it in more context? [[User:Alai|Alai]] ([[User talk:Alai|talk]]) 05:21, 9 February 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Before formal missionary work is authorized for a specific region of the world, a formal prayer/ceremony is often performed... usually officiated by a member of the [[Quorum of the Twelve]]... for the specific country or political unit where the activity will be taking place. This is usually followed (but not always) by the establishment of an LDS mission for that country, or at least the formal introduction of LDS missionaries. This dedicatory prayer is recorded in the official records of the LDS Church, and is usually a date of note in historical accounts about that country for at least the LDS Church members that live in that country. Prior to the dedication, formal approval from the government of that country is usually obtained for permission to begin proseltyzing in that country, if such permission is required, or some sort of formal legal registration has also taken place. |
|||
:As many of these dedicatory prayers are of significant historical vintage, it is certainly noteworthy that somebody currently alive was one of those who officiated at a specific country... so yes, this is something worthy of inclusion into an article like this. Hopefully the former communist government attitude in Slovakia toward religion should be a reason for why this is something of a relatively recent event, while the dedicatory prayer for England took place in the middle of the 19th Century, to give an example. I don't know how to rephrase this better, but I hope this gives some background information for what is happening. And yes, this sentence is very much LDS catch phrases and should be reworded for a more general audience. --[[User:Robert Horning|Robert Horning]] ([[User talk:Robert Horning|talk]]) 02:43, 12 February 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Moving a page == |
|||
[[Secret combination]], a page within the scope of this project is going to have to be moved to make room for a disambiguation page. What would an appropriate name for the new page be? The other page will be ''Secret Combination (song)''. It is a song by [[Kalomoira]]. [[User:Grk1011|Grk1011]] ([[User talk:Grk1011|talk]]) 20:14, 11 February 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Featured article review : [[Golden plates]] == |
|||
[[Golden plates]] has been nominated for a [[Wikipedia:Featured_article_review|featured article review]]. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to [[Wikipedia:What is a featured article?|featured quality]]. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are [[Wikipedia:Featured_article_review|here]]. Reviewers' concerns are [[Wikipedia:Featured_article_review/{{#if:|{{{2}}}|Golden plates}}|here]]. [[User:Serpent's Choice|Serpent's Choice]] ([[User talk:Serpent's Choice|talk]]) 19:03, 12 February 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Eugene England == |
|||
Hi, I'm sorry I don't know all that much about WikiProjects, but I just created a stub for [[Eugene England]] (I feel that he is definitely notable enough in the LDS tradition to warrant a wikipedia page) and I put the <nowiki>{{LDSproject}}</nowiki> boilerplate on it. I don't know if I was supposed to ask about that first or what, but I just was bold and did it. I put it on the list of pages requesting assessment, I'm hoping to add more info to it as time goes on, and I'm asking others (including whoever reads this) to contribute anything they know about the entry for this great thinker. Let me know if I screwed anything up and/or how I can help improve his page from a simple stub. Thanks. [[User:Biggins|biggins]] ([[User talk:Biggins|talk]]) 08:48, 14 February 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Is excluding Haun's Mill from 'List of massacres' biased? == |
|||
Is there a reason that the [[Haun's Mill massacre]] is excluded from the [[List of massacres]] article? Not including it, but including the [[Mountain Meadows massacre]] seems to smack of bias. -- [[Special:Contributions/208.81.184.4|208.81.184.4]] ([[User talk:208.81.184.4|talk]]) 23:46, 21 February 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:It was probably just missed. I've added it to the list. — [[User:Val42|Val42]] ([[User talk:Val42|talk]]) 07:38, 22 February 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::How about [[List of terrorist incidents]]? It lists MMM but not Haun's Mill. Same with [[List of battles and other violent events by death toll]], [[Historical persecution by Christians]] & [[List of United States military history events]]. -- [[Special:Contributions/208.81.184.4|208.81.184.4]] ([[User talk:208.81.184.4|talk]]) 23:00, 7 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::I have added it to the above articles. Good catch. --[[User:Storm Rider|Storm Rider]] [[User talk:Storm Rider|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 01:30, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
Is Haun's Mill and the MMM really a "terrorist incident"? I think both incidents fall better under the definition of [[genocide]]. --[[User:Descartes1979|Descartes1979]] ([[User talk:Descartes1979|talk]]) 06:28, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:BTW - Haun's Mill was not persecution by Christians, but was rather motivated by local political and economic friction. I removed Haun's Mill from [[Historical persecution by Christians]]. --[[User:Descartes1979|Descartes1979]] ([[User talk:Descartes1979|talk]]) 06:32, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:I also removed Haun's Mill from [[List of United States military history events]] - it was perpetrated by the Missouri Militia, a [[paramilitary]] force at best, and not regular U.S. Military. Notice how it was the only action by a militia in the entire article? --[[User:Descartes1979|Descartes1979]] ([[User talk:Descartes1979|talk]]) 06:33, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::Descartes, I saw that you forgot to remove Mountain Meadows from the same sites, so I helped you out. I would disagree with you on Haun's Mill; it happened because they were Mormons not because they were just normal settlers. Attempting to limit the scope to such a narrow perspective is not supported by any reputable historian. MMM does not fit the definition of genocide; one could argue that Haun's Mill was a cultural group, but that still seems to only fit the technical definition. |
|||
::It would have been more helpful if you would have deleted both at the same time, but to only delete Haun's Mill does not lend a lot of evidence to your objectivity. I am sure it was just an oversight. --[[User:Storm Rider|Storm Rider]] [[User talk:Storm Rider|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 07:47, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:You are right Storm Rider, I didn't realize the MMM was in the article [[Religious persecution by Christians]], and I agree that it should not be there. I also agree that MMM was not a military event. However, the [[Utah War]] was, so I am going to add some of the info back to [[List of United States military history events]] - but I will exclude the MMM. Thanks for the catch. --[[User:Descartes1979|Descartes1979]] ([[User talk:Descartes1979|talk]]) 22:03, 8 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
==Egyptian Names in the Book of Mormon== |
|||
Some people want to merge [[Egyptian Names in the Book of Mormon]] with some other article. This would be a great and tragic mistake. Please vote against it. Thank you. Das Baz, aka Erudil 15:27, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
I couldn't disagree more with Das Baz (I proposed the merge) - the content in [[Egyptian names in the Book of Mormon]] and certain sections of [[Linguistics and the Book of Mormon]] are identical. There is a rampant problem with the articles about Mormonism in that there are hundreds of disparate articles on obscure topics, that are not linked in a coherent way. I strongly believe they need to be consolidated so that people who have an interest in Mormon topics can find the information more easily. The Linguistics article gets a lot of traffic, and is referenced by the main Book of Mormon article among others. That is where the information in the Egyptian names article belongs (which is where, by the way, information on Hebrew and Greek names in the Book of Mormon already are). I just don't understand why it would be a "tragic mistake", and have yet to hear a good argument supporting that view. Das, are you sure you aren't overreacting a bit? --[[User:Descartes1979|Descartes1979]] ([[User talk:Descartes1979|talk]]) 17:03, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
No, because I have seen too many cases where a "merge" is just a first step towards total deletion of the facts. Das Baz, aka Erudil 17:23, 11 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Now that the merge is complete, I hope that you will see that we have not deleted the content. --[[User:Descartes1979|Descartes1979]] ([[User talk:Descartes1979|talk]]) 18:16, 10 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
==Daughter of Jared== |
|||
I came across [[Daughter of Jared]] today. I don't think that it will ever be anything other than a stub. Check it out and make any comments on that article's page. — [[User:Val42|Val42]] ([[User talk:Val42|talk]]) 20:24, 31 December 2007 (UTC) |
|||
*I agree - I added a proposed deletion flag.--[[User:Descartes1979|Descartes1979]] ([[User talk:Descartes1979|talk]]) 07:57, 13 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
*Likewise I also proposed the deletion of [[Akish]]. --[[User:Descartes1979|Descartes1979]] ([[User talk:Descartes1979|talk]]) 21:17, 24 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
==''Book of Mormon'' articles== |
|||
The following text was just added to the [[Nephi]] article: |
|||
:"The historicity of the story of Nephi is not generally accepted by non-LDS historians or archaeologists. |
|||
This type of sentence is being added piecemeal to the ''[[Book of Mormon]]'' articles. I think that we need to add this (or something similar) to all of the ''Book of Mormon'' articles, or remove it from all of them. I think that the compromise that will be reached will be somewhere in between, but it needs to be done. The compromise that I suggest is, "'''X''' is, according to the ''[[Book of Mormon]]'', ...." — [[User:Val42|Val42]] ([[User talk:Val42|talk]]) 02:21, 1 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Coordinators for the Christianity projects == |
|||
I have recently started a discussion at [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Christianity#Coordinators?]] regarding the possibility of the various Christianity projects somewhat integrating, in the style of the [[WP:MILHIST|Military history]] project, for the purposes of providing better coordination of project activities. Any parties interested in the idea, or perhaps willing to offer their services as one of the potential coordinators, is more than welcome to make any comments there. Thank you. [[User:John Carter|John Carter]] ([[User talk:John Carter|talk]]) 20:57, 17 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Coordinator? == |
|||
It has probably been noticed by most of the editors who frequent this page that there is often a pronounced degree of overlap between the various projects relating to Christianity. Given that overlap, and the rather large amount of content we have related to the subject of Christianity, it has been proposed that the various Christianity projects select a group of coordinators who would help ensure the cooperation of the various projects as well as help manage some project related activities, such as review, assessment, portal management, and the like. Preferably, we would like to consider the possibility of having one party from each of the major Christianity projects included, given the degree of specialization which some of the articles contain. We now are accepting nominations for the coordinators positions at [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity/Coordinators/Election 1]]. Any parties interested in helping performing some of the management duties of the various Christianity projects is encouraged to nominate themselves there. Thank you. [[User:John Carter|John Carter]] ([[User talk:John Carter|talk]]) 17:37, 31 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Much to my surprise, the period for the factual elections of the new coordinators has started a bit earlier than I expected. For what it's worth, as the "instigator" of the proposed coordinators, the purpose of having them is not to try to impose any sort of "discipline" on the various projects relating to Christianity, but just to ensure that things like assessment, peer review, portal maintainance, and other similar directly project-related functions get peformed for all the various projects relating to Christianity. If there are any individuals with this project who are already doing such activities for the project, and who want to take on the role more formally, I think nominations are being held open until the end of the elections themselves. And, for the purposes of this election, any member in good standing of any of the Christianity projects can either be nominated or express their votes at [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity/Coordinators/Election 1]]. Thank you for your attention. [[User:John Carter|John Carter]] ([[User talk:John Carter|talk]]) 00:38, 15 April 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== [[Technology and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints]]== |
|||
I created the article [[Technology and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints]] because some people think that the church does not support technology and confuse the church with the [[Amish]]. I need your help to expand this article because it is still a stub. Please help me to expand this article.Cmmmm 15:33, 16 April 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:I don't know anyone who thinks that - do you have a reference? I think the article is not nearly notable enough. I have proposed a merge of this content to the main LDS church article.--[[User:Descartes1979|Descartes1979]] ([[User talk:Descartes1979|talk]]) 18:15, 10 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Wikinews & Latter Day Saints reporting == |
|||
Wikipedia's sister project [[Wikinews]] might benefit from some ongoing assistance by people with subject matter expertise on the [[Latter Day Saint movement]], such as those found at this WikiProject. Recent interesting statements in related news stories there include (emphasis mine): |
|||
* 2008-02-04 - ''[http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/LDS_church_names_Monson_their_new_president "LDS church names Monson their new president"]'' currently states that "When the president dies, the President of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles is <b>handed</b> the position" and that "Monson simultaneously <b>served as</b> both First Counselor and <b>President of the Quorum</b> under Hinckney's administration due to his seniority." |
|||
* 2008-04-07 - ''[http://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=401_children_from_Texas_sect_compound_taken_into_custody&oldid=617068 "401 children from Texas sect compound taken into custody"]'' stated for 3 days past it initial publish date that "The Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, a polygamist sect <b>founded</b> by Warren Jeffs – jailed last year for the rape and forced marriage of a 14 year old girl – is a breakaway branch of the Mormon Church." <small>Full disclosure - this has since been corrected.</small> |
|||
* 2008-04-19 - ''[http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Copy_of_handbook_for_leaders_of_the_Church_of_Jesus_Christ_of_Latter-day_Saints_obtained_by_Wikinews "Copy of handbook for leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints obtained by Wikinews"]'' implies that the [[Church Handbook of Instructions]] being available on the internet is somehow a new phenomena, even though it first appeared on the internet about 10 years ago.<br/> |
|||
-- [[Special:Contributions/63.224.135.113|63.224.135.113]] ([[User talk:63.224.135.113|talk]]) 18:14, 19 April 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== LDS project bot == |
|||
I am thinking of creating a [[WP:Bot|bot]] to help with a few of the common tasks related to this project, and I would like to hear what you think. Below I am listing a few of the tasks that it could do. Please add other repetitive tasks that you think would be good to include in its functionality as well: |
|||
#Change references to LDS scriptures into the <nowiki>{{lds}}</nowiki> template. |
|||
#Periodically update the list of pages at [[/Articles needed]] |
|||
#Add navigation templates to new articles |
|||
#Add LDS project tags to new articles |
|||
--[[User:Descartes1979|Descartes1979]] ([[User talk:Descartes1979|talk]]) 16:35, 20 April 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== History of Nauvoo, Illinois & Nauvoo, Illinois == |
|||
[[History of Nauvoo, Illinois]] has been split out of the history section of [[Nauvoo, Illinois]] into a new article. ''History of Nauvoo, Illinois'' needs a better intro, and the history section of ''Nauvoo, Illinois'' needs at least a summary paragraph about the history of the city. -- [[Special:Contributions/208.81.184.4|208.81.184.4]] ([[User talk:208.81.184.4|talk]]) 20:40, 24 April 2008 (UTC) |
|||
==Mark Hofmann edit== |
|||
I'm not really a member of this project, but I was looking at [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_William_Hofmann&diff=209849276&oldid=209000544 this edit] of the [[Mark William Hofmann]] article. It makes some claim about finding some papers somewhere related to the case and claims Church leaders didn't let authorities know about their discovery, blah, blah, blah. I didn't get it all. I thought someone ought to look at it who knows how to balance it out. The ref the editor gave is to an anti-Mormon website, so I don't think it's the most reliable source of information. — [[User:Frecklefoot|Frecklefσσt]] | [[User talk:Frecklefoot|Talk]] 15:33, 5 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
==[[Polygamy in the United States]]== |
|||
Recent changes here use Mormon in reference to the movement, the LDS Church, and the FLDS and related offshoots. Needs a real copy edit and some balance. Also, given the title, needs information on US polygamists not affiliated with the LDS movement. [[User:WBardwin|WBardwin]] ([[User talk:WBardwin|talk]]) 23:38, 9 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Are there any polygamist groups in the US not affiliated with the LDS movement? I don't think there are, but I could be wrong. --[[User:Descartes1979|Descartes1979]] ([[User talk:Descartes1979|talk]]) 18:09, 10 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::There's [[House of Yahweh]]. — [[User:Val42|Val42]] ([[User talk:Val42|talk]]) 02:35, 16 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Baptism in the LDS == |
|||
There has been some recent discussion at the new [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity/General Forum]] page about what to do with all the articles relating to baptism in the various Christian churches. A list of the articles invovled can be found at [[User:Pastordavid/workpage]]. Some of these articles relate specifically to the LDS churches. I think we would all welcome any input from members of this project regarding what if anything to do with the articles, which might include keeping them separate, merging them, or otherwise dealing with them. Thank you for your attention. [[User:John Carter|John Carter]] ([[User talk:John Carter|talk]]) 15:48, 23 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Wikiproject in Spanish == |
|||
Hi! I come from Spanish Wikiproject of LDS. We have got an idea there about translation. We can translate articles onto the rest on languages, I mean, for example, translate [[Nukuʻalofa Tonga Temple]] onto Tongan language and the rest of articles the same. What do you think? For do this we need help to say it on the other Wikipedias. I'll try to translate onto Catalonian and Occitanian. Please, help us with this. --[[User:Jeneme|Jeneme]] ([[User talk:Jeneme|talk]]) 11:28, 31 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:I'll help. It sounds like English isn't your native language, so if you need help with translating just let me know. I'd try to translate them to Spanish myself, but the last time I tried that on Wikipedia, someone thought my translation was "espantoso". — [[User:Val42|Val42]] ([[User talk:Val42|talk]]) 16:04, 31 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:: My native language is Spanish (my English is very poor as you see). In Spanish LDS project we're doing this. [http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usuario:Rjgalindo Rjgalindo] and [http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usuario:Lokj Lokj] translate articles from English to Spanish, and then [http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usuario:Chabi Chabi] correct the mistakes from translation. So, when you translate an article into Spanish, tell it to [http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usuario:Chabi Chabi], he'll help you and, of course, tell it to me. --[[User:Jeneme|Jeneme]] ([[User talk:Jeneme|talk]]) 07:04, 1 June 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::These folks in the Spanish wiki are doing a fantastic job, so far I know none are LDS. I try to keep up with them, but my main focus is medicine in Spanish, which is «espantoso». Now they're moving into other languages and leading the project there. So whatever you can do to help in any of the languages would be an enormous contribution. Even if your spanish isn't too sharp as it once probably was, come stop by our discussion pages and we'll touch it up. Un abrazo, [[User:Bobjgalindo|Bobjgalindo]] ([[User talk:Bobjgalindo|talk]]) 13:16, 1 June 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Question regarding template == |
|||
Good morning folks, |
|||
With the recent announcement of new temples in Arizona I have noticed that {{tl|List LDS Temple USA West}} has been getting a little crowded, particularly in the Phoenix area. I'm also concerned that some of the other spots on the map (Idaho in particular) may be a little crowded on higher-resolution displays, as well. Not only is the map getting physically crowded, but the list itself is getting a bit long and thus the template is starting to get, well, large. |
|||
I am wondering if it might not make more sense into two (or possibly more) templates, which would allow for less crowding on the map and a smaller, more manageable list? I've made a couple of sample templates to show what I mean, compared up against the current template - all three are shown [[User:Shereth/Sandbox/TemplateCompare|here]] for simple comparison. |
|||
Please let me know what you think about splitting this template up. [[User:Shereth|<b><font color="#0000FF">Sher</font></b>]]<b><font color="#6060BF">[[User_talk:Shereth|eth]]</font></b> 17:55, 24 June 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Good work; it looks better split up. --[[User:Storm Rider|Storm Rider]] [[User talk:Storm Rider|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 19:07, 24 June 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::I take it this isn't an especially active project? I'd normally hope for a bit more feedback before implementing the change, any clue as to how long is a good idea to wait given the level of participation in discussion on this project? [[User:Shereth|<b><font color="#0000FF">Sher</font></b>]]<b><font color="#6060BF">[[User_talk:Shereth|eth]]</font></b> 16:43, 25 June 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::LOL, no Shereth, it is not as active as it could be. However, I would hope you would lean towards boldness and move forward. I have not attempted to contact other editors to draw attention to this proposal, but I also don't think it is controversial. I would wait no longer than Friday and then proceed. You have my thanks for your efforts. --[[User:Storm Rider|Storm Rider]] [[User talk:Storm Rider|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 19:49, 25 June 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::I went ahead and implemented the change - I figure if there's some strong objection to it, it can always be reverted :) [[User:Shereth|<b><font color="#0000FF">Sher</font></b>]]<b><font color="#6060BF">[[User_talk:Shereth|eth]]</font></b> 03:36, 26 June 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== [[Patty Bartlett Sessions]] == |
|||
[[Patty Bartlett Sessions]] is up for [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Patty Bartlett Sessions|deletion]]. The article describes her as a Mormon pioneer: can anybody refer me to sources that will back up her notability? Thanks.--[[User:SarekOfVulcan|SarekOfVulcan]] ([[User talk:SarekOfVulcan|talk]]) 17:02, 26 June 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Major restructuring proposal for polygamy related articles == |
|||
[[Image:Nuvola apps important.svg|48px|left]]A major restructuring proposal for all polygamy articles related to Mormonism has been made at [[Talk:Joseph Smith, Jr. and polygamy#Series and Restructuring proposal]]. Please visit and give your two cents. --[[User:Descartes1979|Descartes1979]] ([[User talk:Descartes1979|talk]]) 04:56, 30 June 2008 (UTC) |
|||
==Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme== |
|||
As you [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2008-06-23/Dispatches|may have heard]], we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at [[Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Assessment|WP:ASSESS]]. |
|||
*The '''new C-Class''' represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class. |
|||
*The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of [[Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Assessment/B-Class_criteria|a rubric]], and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects. |
|||
*A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as [[Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Assessment/A-Class_criteria|described here]]. |
|||
Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at [[:Category:C-Class_articles]]. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. [[Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Index|The bot]] is already finding and listing C-Class articles. |
|||
Please [[Wikipedia_talk:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Assessment#WikiProject_responses|leave a message]] with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the [[Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team|1.0 Editorial Team]], <font color="green">[[User:ShepBot|'''§hepBot''']]</font>''' <small>(<font color="red">[[User talk:ShepBot|Disable]]</font>)'''</small> 21:36, 4 July 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Mostly done with construction of [[Latter Day Saint polygamy in the late 19th century]], could use your help == |
|||
Per the restructuring initiative noted above, I have finished my first cut at the new article [[Latter Day Saint polygamy in the late 19th century]], and could really use some help in filling out the content for things that I have missed, and general wiki style article revision. There are also two sections that I don't have as much info on right now, (you will see them towards the end of the article) which, again, I could use some help filling out. --[[User:Descartes1979|Descartes1979]] ([[User talk:Descartes1979|talk]]) 05:04, 9 July 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Articles flagged for cleanup == |
|||
Currently, 815 articles are assigned to this project, of which 285, or 35.0%, are flagged for cleanup of some sort. (Data as of {{date|2008-07-14}}.) Are you interested in finding out more? I am offering to generate cleanup to-do lists on a project or work group level. See [[User:B. Wolterding/Cleanup listings]] for details. More than 150 projects and work groups [[:Category:WolterBot cleanup listing subscriptions|have already subscribed]], and adding a subscription for yours is easy - just place [[User:WolterBot/Cleanup listing subscription|a template]] on your project page. |
|||
If you want to respond to this canned message, please do so at [[User talk:B. Wolterding|my user talk page]]; I'm not watching this page. --[[User:B. Wolterding|B. Wolterding]] ([[User talk:B. Wolterding|talk]]) 16:31, 27 July 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== "List of topics" article should be moved to WP:LDS space? == |
|||
I came across [[List of topics about the Latter Day Saint movement]] trying to figure something else out, and I noticed there had been some question about whether it shouldn't go into the project space because categories serve the same purpose as the page for article space. I happen to agree with that, so I figured I'd bring it to the project's attention for a to-do. [[User:MSJapan|MSJapan]] ([[User talk:MSJapan|talk]]) 22:09, 15 August 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== [[Laie Hawaii Temple]] == |
|||
Now that Laie Hawaii Temple is a good article, I would like to focus on bringing it to featured status. I have set aside some open tasks in my user space if anyone is interested in collaborating. You can find it [[User:Viriditas/Laie Hawaii Temple|here]]. Thanks. [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 09:22, 22 August 2008 (UTC) |
|||
==Categories== |
|||
I just went through all of the categories related to the LDS movement and tagged them all to be included in the scope of this project, there were around 400 of them - which seems rather excessive to me. Are we sure we aren't over doing it with all of the granular categories? I saw dozens of them with only 1 article in them. --[[User:Descartes1979|Descartes1979]] ([[User talk:Descartes1979|talk]]) 23:14, 31 August 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Do you have specific examples? A generalized term such as "dozens of them" tells me nothing. Unless you are more specific, I cannot tell what it is in particular you are referring to. Thanks in advance for the clarification, and rest assured that if I know what it is you have reference to I would be happy to help out. --[[User:Jgstokes|Jgstokes-We can disagree without being disagreeable]] ([[User talk:Jgstokes|talk]]) 02:53, 1 September 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::Well, I am not going to go back through 400 category pages to pull out the ones that have one page in the category - for now all I can say is that it happened quite a bit while I was going through them the first time around. Check out my contrib history to see the list of the category pages I touched (I think I got 95% of them). --[[User:Descartes1979|Descartes1979]] ([[User talk:Descartes1979|talk]]) 04:50, 4 September 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Free photos of General Authorities? == |
|||
Does anyone have any leads on where "free" photos of General Authorities might be found? (Especially those who are still living, for which WP policy generally forbids "fair use" of copyrighted photos.) |
|||
I recently came across the photo of [[David A. Bednar|Elder Bednar]], speaking at a BYU commencement and wearing an academic robe, and the thought occurred to me that a non-LDS reader — especially someone outside North America or western Europe — might not realize the significance of this mode of dress and could come away with the misperception that this was some sort of Mormon clerical attire. I'd love to replace the existing [[:Image:Elder Bednar.jpeg|photo]] with one showing him wearing a suit and tie, but I haven't been able to find a photo without copyright strings attached. [[User:Richwales|Richwales]] ([[User talk:Richwales|talk]]) 07:16, 2 September 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Articles about LDS in other languages == |
|||
Just as a general thought, I'd like to suggest the idea that those of us with reasonable foreign language skills might want to go check out the LDS-related articles (if any) in various non-English editions of Wikipedia, and make whatever contributions we can to improve (or create) those articles. |
|||
I did this myself, about a year ago, with the [[:ro:Biserica lui Isus Hristos a Sfinţilor din Zilele din Urmă|Romanian article about the Church]]. That page was originally a grotesque hatchet job that had probably been copied straight out of some anti-Mormon tract — but now (through the efforts of several people, not just me) it's a reasonable description of Mormonism that will hopefully make sense to someone who is completely unfamiliar with the subject. |
|||
Some Wikipedia editions, of course, don't have any LDS-related articles at all. I happened to be looking at the [[:ka:|Georgian Wikipedia]] recently, and there doesn't appear to be anything there about the Latter Day Saint movement right now. I don't speak Georgian, so I can't help, but maybe someone here does (or knows someone who does). [[User:Richwales|Richwales]] ([[User talk:Richwales|talk]]) 07:39, 2 September 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Latter Day Saint movement == |
|||
[[Wikipedia:Release Version|Wikipedia 0.7]] is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The [[Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team]] has made an [http://toolserver.org/~cbm/release-data/2008-9-13/HTML/ automated selection of articles for Version 0.7]. |
|||
We would like to ask you to review the [http://toolserver.org/~cbm/release-data/2008-9-13/HTML/Latter_Day_Saint_movement.s0.html articles selected from this project]. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at [[Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7]]. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at [[Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations]]. |
|||
A [http://toolserver.org/~cbm/cgi-bin/problems.cgi list of selected articles with cleanup tags], sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with [[Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Copyediting|copyediting requests]], although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible. |
|||
We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at [[User:SelectionBot/0.7/L-1|this project's subpage]] of [[User:SelectionBot/0.7]]. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, [[User:SelectionBot|SelectionBot]] 23:22, 15 September 2008 (UTC) |
|||
==[[Criticism of the Latter Day Saint movement]]== |
|||
Please, any help possible would be appreciated in bringing this article to a neutral state. It is in need of serious consideration. Thanks. --[[User:TrustTruth|TrustTruth]] ([[User talk:TrustTruth|talk]]) 19:00, 1 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Good luck - since it is a [[WP:FORK|POV Fork]], I doubt it will ever be neutral.--[[User:Descartes1979|Descartes1979]] ([[User talk:Descartes1979|talk]]) 06:12, 3 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Date formatting == |
|||
Hello - I noticed that a couple of templates used by this project, namely [[Template:Infobox LDS Temple]] and [[Template:LDS Temple list]], encourage using the "2008-10-05" date format that is not recommended by [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)]]. I'd like to move them over to the "5 October 2008" format to be consistent with dates used in lists and tables in the rest of Wikipedia. Is there anything you'd like me to consider before making the switch? —[[User:Remember the dot|Remember the dot]] <sup>([[User talk:Remember the dot|talk]])</sup> 22:27, 5 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:OK, I'm going to start in on the date reformatting. You can help by adding <code>importScript('User:Remember the dot/ISO date format unifier.js')</code> to [[Special:Mypage/monobook.js|your monobook.js]], editing the [[Special:Allpages/Template:LDS Temple|subpages of Template:LDS Temple]], and clicking "Format ISO dates in international style" in the toolbox. —[[User:Remember the dot|Remember the dot]] <sup>([[User talk:Remember the dot|talk]])</sup> 05:37, 7 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::Most of the dates have been switched over now; I'll probably switch the remaining ones over in the next few days. Please let me know if there are any problems; it's a bit disconcerting to not have much feedback on this. —[[User:Remember the dot|Remember the dot]] <sup>([[User talk:Remember the dot|talk]])</sup> 06:45, 7 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::: The problem is that the comparison list now doesn't work at all for sorting. I think this should also have been brought up on the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Latter Day Saint movement/Temples]]. Additionally, now the dates are formatted the way they were entered rather in the way that complies with each user's preferences under the [[Special:Preferences]] date tab. Finally, we should leave the data as is and modify the template to make changes to the way it is presented rather than making changes to all the different templates. The ISO format is consistent and can much more easily be put into whatever format is needed, where the current data entry is inconsistent and can not be manipulated in the template at all - but must be used as is. |
|||
::: I understand the problem with having date links everywhere - but that is a programming issue with MediaWiki - not something we should fix with the data. The problem is that in order to have the dates formatted to match the user's preferences they have to be wikilinks, but the date standard has evolved to favor NOT wikilinking all dates - so that means that the user preference is completely ignored for most dates now. Personally, I think the prior standard should prevail - the favoring of formatting dates according to the user preferences, until the software is fixed and date formatting applied to dates that aren't wikilinked as well as those that are. --<font color="#06C">[[User_talk:Trödel|Trödel]]</font> 12:12, 7 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::: I am also surprised that you didn't address the reasons that ISO format was originally chosen that were specified on the instruction page, ''"use [[ISO 8601]] YYYY-MM-DD format{reference-footnote} This will allow sorting by year in Compare list, and wikilinking to date format according to user settings. For example [<nowiki>[</nowiki>1937-03-06]] formats as [[1937-03-06]], formatted according to your user preference see [[m:Image:Date-preferences-Screenshot.png|screenshot]]{end reference}"'' --<font color="#06C">[[User_talk:Trödel|Trödel]]</font> 12:20, 7 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::: I'm going to agree with Trödel. The purpose of these templates is to store the data only, not to provide formatting. The formatting should be set where the data is used. – [[User_talk:Jaksmata|<font color="black" style="background:#FFFFDD"><font color="red">'''j'''</font>ak<font color="red">'''s'''</font>mata</font>]] 14:49, 7 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
OK, thank you for responding. [[Comparison of temples of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints]] now acts as before, with the dates in YYYY-MM-DD format. |
|||
The problem with using [[2008-10-07]] for dates is that for nearly everyone it shows up as [[2008|2008]]-[[October 7|10-07]]. Using date preferences to change this just creates a disconnect between our readers and our editors, which is not good. As you mentioned, it also creates overlinking, and without even more complex code (that the templates have not had) single years like [[1896]] get linked too. |
|||
I see your point about wanting to store dates as YYYY-MM-DD and then just reformatting them as needed. This is not a bad idea, however we ought to consider that most of the time the appropriate date format is "7 October 2008", not "2008-10-07". It's confusing, especially to newcomers, when the code inside the template does not match what they are actually seeing on the page. |
|||
So the problem boils down to whether dates should be stored in "2008-10-07" format and then reformatted into "7 October 2008" most of the time, or stored as "7 October 2008" and then reformatted into "2008-10-07" when occasionally necessary. —[[User:Remember the dot|Remember the dot]] <sup>([[User talk:Remember the dot|talk]])</sup> 18:57, 7 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
Sorry for being gone so long - I have been trying to figure out a way to reformat the ISO format to the 7 October 2008 format - I think I have that done. In the meantime I have ignored this conversation :( - |
|||
Anyway take a look at [[User_talk:Trödel/Sandbox1]] which outputs the correct format from ISO dates to d Month YYYY type format. (This test page uses [[User_talk:Trödel/Sandbox2]] and [[User:Trödel/Sandbox2]] as copies of the Salt Lake and Arizona temples, and the Gilbert Temple's regular template page as a control. I created a template, [[User_talk:Trödel/Sandbox3]], which converts the format; however it will only work if the inputed date is an ISO Date (or a straight number YYYYMMDD) - I'm trying to figure out if I can do something different - like if the date is in a different format if I can do something smart rather than return an ugly red expression error (see the Gilbert Arizona Temple on my [[User_talk:Trödel/Sandbox1|test page]]. (as a note [[User:Trödel/Sandbox1]] acts as the {{tl|LDS Temple list}} template for the testing since a change will need to be made to that template. |
|||
Before I implement the proposed solution on the template page, I was wondering if your bot thing allows you to reverse the change of the date made, as I don't want to see the red error text on any of the pages :) --<font color="#06C">[[User_talk:Trödel|Trödel]]</font> 19:20, 7 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Ouch, "<tt>announcement = 19191003</tt>" looks really unintuitive. How is this better than using "<tt>announcement = 3 October 1919</tt>" and having unusual templates reformat it into "1919-10-03" when occasionally necessary, as is currently done? |
|||
:As for the script, yes, it can be modified to do pretty much whatever needs to be done. —[[User:Remember the dot|Remember the dot]] <sup>([[User talk:Remember the dot|talk]])</sup> 19:26, 7 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::: My bad - they can be in the ISO format as well - I just left it in that format when I was doing some experimenting to see if I could support any random format the user might put in there. |
|||
::: I can not think of a way to convert the format of d Month Year to other formats because the String parser functions are not implemented on Wikipedia (or any Wikimedia project). So although MediaWiki (the software) has an available solution, we can't use it here. That is where I went first in trying to resolve the problem - can we convert it back to the ISO format for the comparison page. |
|||
::: The only thing I can think of is to use the ISO format and manipulate it since the #expr function treats an ISO date as a mathematical expression evaluation 1919-10-3 as 1916 - but since the order of operations is preserved, we can preserve the information from the ISO format and extract it out in different formats we want by mathematically changing it to 191910.03. Now I understand why so many templates use a separate variable for year month and date information. I am going to try to get my date conversion template to convert the data to yyyy|m|d - so that we can use all of the date calculation templates that others have already created rather than creating additional ones for ourselves, but I'm not sure that it will work since the "|" character doesn't transfer well at times from one template to another. --<font color="#06C">[[User_talk:Trödel|Trödel]]</font> 19:49, 7 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
(edit conflict) |
|||
:: I just took a look at the change you made for the comparison page, using the #time parser function was my first thought as well - that way we could take the format however someone enters it on the data page and output it the way we want. Unfortunately, it is not that easy :( |
|||
:: The #time function only works for dates after 1 January 1970 and returns 1 January 1970 for any prior date for example 31 January 1871 returns as {{#time:Y-m-d|31 January 1871}}; or even if you want the same format back {{#time:j F Y|31 January 1871}}. |
|||
:: This makes the whole problem much more difficult - but I think the solution on my Sandboxes works. |
|||
:: The question now is how to format on the different pages, YYYY-MM-DD is obviously the preferred method on the comparison page. I agree that D Month Year looks good on the infobox and the list page. |
|||
:: The next question is "should we wikiformat it at all?" so that the user's preferences will over-ride the standard format. I like that they can be overridden, but it looks like my preferences is not "in vogue" see {{tl|Infobox Person}}, but {{tl|Infobox Pope}} still links the dates. So although there is still some disagreement and Wikiprojects are determining the formatting for their related pages, it looks like not linking is becoming the preferred method (a cursory review of templates in [[:Category:Royalty and nobility infobox templates]] show that all the ones I checked do not link the date). I think there are too many links on the Lists of temples pages - so I would be fine with having no links there. |
|||
:: Thoughts?? --<font color="#06C">[[User_talk:Trödel|Trödel]]</font> 19:40, 7 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::: That's weird - if you use the #time function in a template that is transcluded on a page it reacts differently than if you use it directly on a page - as with the error messages above - but on the comparison page the date is displayed as 1970-01-01 --<font color="#06C">[[User_talk:Trödel|Trödel]]</font> 19:54, 7 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::(edit conflict) |
|||
:::Gaa, you're right about the 1970 date barrier, I didn't notice that before. The bug related to this is [[:bugzilla:11686]]. Thank you for being so patient about this. |
|||
:::Your solution looks better than what we have right now, however I would really like to see the #time ParserFunction expanded to work at least for [[Gregorian calendar|Gregorian]] (post-1582) dates. I may be able to get a MediaWiki patch together to fix this myself, we'll have to see. |
|||
:::Would it be OK if we left the templates messy for another day or two while I see what can be done on the MediaWiki end? If it turns out nothing can be done then let's use your solution, or see if we can split the dates into day, month, and year parameters. —[[User:Remember the dot|Remember the dot]] <sup>([[User talk:Remember the dot|talk]])</sup> 20:06, 7 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::: I sent an email to Tim Starling (the guy who wrote the #time parser function) and asked if there was any chance on getting it to work with dates prior to 1970; hopefully he'll say yes. But if not we may need to find someone who can right the date code for that using PHP. If you can fix the MediaWiki end that would be great - and I'm ok on waiting. I'll let you know if Tim replies, you can email me at my wikipedia name (substituting o for ö) at gmail.com. |
|||
:::: Since that is the case - I'll not spend anymore time on the ISO date converter template I had created - I was planning on supporting a few different formats and converting from an ISO date to d Month Year; D MON YY; Month d, Year; Mon d, Year; Mon d; d Month at the very least - but that is probably more work than I should take on right now, but it would be fun work :) --<font color="#06C">[[User_talk:Trödel|Trödel]]</font> 20:20, 7 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Looking at the functions available in PHP, it unfortunately doesn't look like there's an easy way to make this work :-( |
|||
:::::It should be possible to extend #time to 1901 at least, which would be an improvement, but it's still not far enough back for our purposes. Interestingly, if PHP and MediaWiki are still around in 2038 this problem is really going to rear its ugly teeth because of the [[year 2038 problem]]. PHP itself may have to be fixed before the problem truly goes away. |
|||
:::::If Tim looks at it and is unable to resolve the problem, what do you think we should do? Should we use your parsing code, or just split the dates into 3 parameters for day, month, and year? —[[User:Remember the dot|Remember the dot]] <sup>([[User talk:Remember the dot|talk]])</sup> 21:51, 7 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::::I think that we should just use the parsing code. Two reasons- 1) we would need to create about 8 more variables in each template - and I worry that there already is too many. 2) once the fix is in from PHP 5.3 (below) it would need to be switched back. Better to keep it as readable computer/human information now and parse the information out. |
|||
::::::I was worried that we wouldn't be able to do it, but luckily the expr command resolves all inserted variables first then solves the expression keeping the order of operations - I rely on that to get the different parts out of the ISO date. Of course if they just would let the string functions loose on Wikipedia that would make it easier, but I understand and agree that if they did it would be unleashing a potential nightmare of problems from users using them when they weren't absolutely necessary. --<font color="#06C">[[User_talk:Trödel|Trödel]]</font> 22:35, 7 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Ah, there is hope! From what I've read, it sounds like PHP 5.3 will will eliminate the 1970 and 2038 barriers. PHP 5.3 is expected out later this month ([http://wiki.php.net/todo/php53 timetable]), so we shouldn't have too long to wait before this problem can be properly fixed. —[[User:Remember the dot|Remember the dot]] <sup>([[User talk:Remember the dot|talk]])</sup> 22:01, 7 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::::Do you know if there is an update schedule planned for Wikipedia servers going to 5.3? --<font color="#06C">[[User_talk:Trödel|Trödel]]</font> 22:35, 7 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::No, but I have better news: from my testing it looks like the barriers are already nonexistent in the latest stable PHP (5.2.4) when using the [http://us2.php.net/manual/en/function.date-create.php date_create] and [http://us2.php.net/manual/en/function.date-format.php date_format] functions. So, it *should* be possible to patch MediaWiki to use these functions instead of using [http://us2.php.net/manual/en/function.strtotime.php strtotime]. —[[User:Remember the dot|Remember the dot]] <sup>([[User talk:Remember the dot|talk]])</sup> 02:32, 8 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::: Sounds Great! --<font color="#06C">[[User_talk:Trödel|Trödel]]</font> 10:56, 8 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
This discussion seems to have stopped, but there's a problem: right now some of the dates are in YYYY-MM-DD (ISO) format, and some are in D MMMM YYYY (MOS) format. It's totally inconsistent and it screws up the sorting on the temple comparison grid. Someone needs to either put it back in the ISO format (at least temporarily) or change the rest of the dates to the MOS format (with the understanding that the sorting will be figured out/fixed later. Which one is it going to be? – [[User_talk:Jaksmata|<font color="black" style="background:#FFFFDD"><font color="red">'''j'''</font>ak<font color="red">'''s'''</font>mata</font>]] 16:34, 9 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Right now we're waiting for the MediaWiki developers to respond to [[:bugzilla:11686]]. Once they say whether or not the patch will be implemented we'll know how to proceed. I'm sorry that the dates are such a mess in the meantime, but I think it'd be better to wait instead of rushing into something again. —[[User:Remember the dot|Remember the dot]] <sup>([[User talk:Remember the dot|talk]])</sup> 17:01, 9 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:If you can, it would be helpful if you voted for [[:bugzilla:11686]]. —[[User:Remember the dot|Remember the dot]] <sup>([[User talk:Remember the dot|talk]])</sup> 17:02, 9 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::I'm not too familiar with bugzilla, but I did manage to vote for it. (The last few posts went over my head initially...) I'll be patient and wait to see what happens with the bug. – [[User_talk:Jaksmata|<font color="black" style="background:#FFFFDD"><font color="red">'''j'''</font>ak<font color="red">'''s'''</font>mata</font>]] 20:27, 9 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::Thanks for voting! The patch to fix the bug is sitting there waiting for review, but I don't think the MediaWiki developers work on weekends, so it looks like we're going to have to wait until Monday at least before we can know for sure whether it'll be accepted. —[[User:Remember the dot|Remember the dot]] <sup>([[User talk:Remember the dot|talk]])</sup> 18:51, 11 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
I think I've solved the problem! It turns out that there's a quirk in MediaWiki where if you pass "<tt>|local</tt>" to the #time function, the 1970 and 2038 date barriers disappear. The #time function should still be fixed in MediaWiki, but this gives us a way to work around the problem quite well. |
|||
Armed with this knowledge, I've recoded [[Template:LDS Temple compare]] to do the following with its date parameters: |
|||
* If the date matches the format "1 February 2000", it is formatted as "2000-02-01". |
|||
* If the date matches the format "February 2000", it is formatted as "2000-02". |
|||
* If the date does not match either of these formats, it is displayed as entered. This means that if an editor makes a mistake when entering the date, at worst it will just show up in the wrong format instead of not showing up at all. |
|||
Please let me know if this solution works for you! If it does then we should get started converting the remaining dates to "1 February 2000" format. —[[User:Remember the dot|Remember the dot]] <sup>([[User talk:Remember the dot|talk]])</sup> 00:57, 13 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
=== Larger issue with dates in Wikipedia === |
|||
As a further comment, I was unaware that if you weren't logged in you saw the dates as 2008-10-07. Thanks for bringing that up. I thought that they formatted as October 7, 2008 if you had no preference chosen - but it looks like it formats the way they were entered rather than defaulting to a format that is appropriate for your language/country. We need to resolve that as the ISO dates are awkward and hard to read --<font color="#06C">[[User_talk:Trödel|Trödel]]</font> 22:37, 7 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
Also - [[User:Omegatron/Date formatting|this proposal]] looks useful. Unfortunately the advocate is no longer active on Wikipedia. --<font color="#06C">[[User_talk:Trödel|Trödel]]</font> 22:40, 7 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Camp Onway == |
|||
[[Camp Onway]] is a former Boy Scout camp now owned by the LDS Church. Do you folks want to take this over? --—<i><b>— [[User:Gadget850|<font color = "gray">Gadget850 (Ed)</font>]]<font color = "darkblue"> <sup>[[User talk:Gadget850|''talk'']]</sup></font></b> - </i> 15:34, 22 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Elijah Abel == |
|||
There is currently a deletion request at [[:Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Elijah Abel drawing.png|Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Elijah Abel drawing.png]] for the image used on the [[Elijah Abel]] article. It has been demonstrated that the image in question is found in ''[[w:Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought|Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought]]'', Volume 12 Issue 2 ([http://content.lib.utah.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/dialogue&CISOPTR=5687&REC=4 here]), but the current thinking on commons seems to be that ''Dialogue'' got the image wrong. Since I do not have access to the material that being claimed as the real source of this image, I was hoping someone could look at this. -- [[Special:Contributions/208.81.184.4|208.81.184.4]] ([[User talk:208.81.184.4|talk]]) 16:07, 17 November 2008 (UTC) |
|||
==James Calvin Sly== |
|||
The article on [[James Calvin Sly]] (a LDS pioneer, and member of the [[Mormon Battalion]]) is in a sorry state. Anyone willing to help with it? -- [[Special:Contributions/208.81.184.4|208.81.184.4]] ([[User talk:208.81.184.4|talk]]) 17:33, 17 November 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== W.B. Enniss == |
|||
The article on [[W.B. Enniss]] has been successfully nominated for [[WP:PROD|procedural deletion]] on notability grounds. While the present state of the article certainyl doesn't assert notability, there are a couple of online references including [http://books.google.com.au/books?id=XEpUpEqDCfgC&pg=RA3-PA40&lpg=RA3-PA40&dq=%22w.+b.+Enniss%22&source=web&ots=1ZFlCBM-Xf&sig=_vaTFXGu9sSf0DRNq8B5IQkg1XE&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=6&ct=result this] which notes he was Bishop of Draper until 1910, and [http://www.historypreserved.com/willard_boulter_enniss_1857-1947.htm this] which appears to be a primary source but implies an important pioneering role. |
|||
These sources don't of themselves confirm notability, but they suggest there ''might'' be more somewhere. If anyone with a background knowledge of Mormon history has a few spare minutes, they might like to have a look at the article and see if it can be expanded to include a referenced assertion of notability. If not (or if Enniss genuinely isn't notable), no worries and the article will probably be deleted in the next day or so. [[User:Euryalus|Euryalus]] ([[User talk:Euryalus|talk]]) 21:40, 20 November 2008 (UTC) |
|||
: A prod deletion is primarily for deleting articles for which there is not a reasonable objection. All you need to do is remove the prod notice, edit the article, and include the resources you posted here. If the anyone doesn't agree that the material you provided is sufficient, they can move to the next step and nominate the article for deletion under AfD. In this case I have removed the notice and included the references you have provided, but I am still not convinced that he meets the requirements for inclusion (as I haven't reviewed everything yet - just trying to help you out). Be sure to write some things in his article that explain/make claims why this person should be included. --<font color="#06C">[[User_talk:Trödel|Trödel]]</font> 21:50, 20 November 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::Thanks for your response. I don't believe the sources I list above are sufficient to indicate notability, which is why I was asking if anyone here knew of any more. It's not a subject I know anything about so I won't be adding anything further to the page - just drawing it to the attention of this WikiProject as one that has an interest in the article. |
|||
::I should also clarify that I was not contesting the PROD, which is why I left the tag in place. Your removal of it ''does'' contest it, so the next step for the article is either improvement or AfD. Either way, I'm just the messenger :) [[User:Euryalus|Euryalus]] ([[User talk:Euryalus|talk]]) 22:06, 20 November 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::: Sorry - I skimmed your message and didn't read the last paragraph carefully. If I can't find notability - I'll delete the article myself since the prod survived the 5 day waiting period. --<font color="#06C">[[User_talk:Trödel|Trödel]]</font> 22:17, 20 November 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::: I could not confirm that this person met the criteria for inclusion. In fact from the research I did it is doubtful that independent third party sources will list more than that he was a bishop, served a mission, and was the owner/manager for several businesses. Thus I deleted the article --<font color="#06C">[[User_talk:Trödel|Trödel]]</font> 22:41, 20 November 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== [[:simple:Mormonism|Mormonism]] at the Simple English Wikipedia == |
|||
Just letting you know that the Mormonism article at the [[Simple English Wikipedia]] is in a situation where it's written as if the LDS church itself is the Latter Day Saint Movement. --[[User:WikiLeon|<font color="#cc0000">w</font><font color="#00cc00"><sup>L</sup></font>]]<sup><[[User talk:WikiLeon|speak]]·[[Special:Contributions/WikiLeon|check]]></sup> 01:44, 29 November 2008 (UTC) |
|||
: I'm not sure if that is totally inappropriate as the subtle differences between the CJC LDS and the other denominations may not be appropriate for simple english. However, the differences should be mentioned with a reference to here probablly. --<font color="#06C">[[User_talk:Trödel|Trödel]]</font> 16:34, 29 November 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::Well, a lot of changes were made so not to make it [http://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mormonism&diff=1189963&oldid=1169971 look like it is another LDS church article]. We don't have to go into much detail about the differences between CoC and LDS's doctorine, but I think the article should be an overview of basic doctrines (most likely the [[Articles of Faith]]) and how the movement spread out during the [[Succession Crisis]]. Mormonism is defined at simplewiki as a religious movement (like enwiki's [[Latter Day Saint movement]]) but enwiki focuses on its use as a term and how LDS seems to "own" it. --[[User:WikiLeon|<font color="#cc0000">w</font><font color="#00cc00"><sup>L</sup></font>]]<sup><[[User talk:WikiLeon|speak]]·[[Special:Contributions/WikiLeon|check]]></sup> 11:24, 30 November 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::We'd really welcome some people who could give both a general overview, and an in-depths description; I am not versed in it, but the CoC seems to be at the point of being accepted as a "Protestant" movement, while the LDS isn't. It would therefore be nice if it was possible to give "general doctrines of faith" (at the general Mormonism article) and specific beliefs of the LDS and CoC at their respective pages. "Simple" in Simple English refers to the language, not the concepts used. Note also that you can write in "complex" English, put a "complex" tag on top, and leave the SEWP editors to simplify,if worst comes to worst. --[[User:Eptalon|Eptalon]] ([[User talk:Eptalon|talk]]) 12:18, 30 November 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Edit war in [[Polygamy]] article == |
== Edit war in [[Polygamy]] article == |
Revision as of 17:12, 16 January 2009
Archives
Edit war in Polygamy article
There is a dispute in progress in the Polygamy article (see this diff) over whether certain material should or should not be added to the "Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and Mormon fundamentalists" subsection of the "Patterns of occurrence across religions" section. We need input from more people in order to break the current game of edit-war ping-pong. Any comments? Richwales (talk) 21:22, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
- I will comment on the relevant talk page when I get there. Right now, I am going through the items on my watchlist and trying to catch up with WP happenings. I'll be commenting within a few minutes. Thank you for drawing this to my attention. --Jgstokes-We can disagree without being disagreeable (talk) 18:45, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks. The current consensus is that this is a case of a newbie IP editor who has been trying repeatedly to insert a piece of material about early, public LDS statements against polygamy. After ignoring requests to take it to the talk page, honour WP:3RR, be respectful in edit summaries, etc., he's currently blocked for a week. As for whether the material he's been proposing is worthwhile — either in the Polygamy article or in one of the LDS-specific article — that may still be an open question. Richwales (talk) 19:07, 2 December 2008 (UTC)