This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Boston Massachusetts Temple article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It should be pointed out that many LDS Temples are tied up in lawsuits. This is the whole reason Orin Hatch pushed through the Religious Land Use Act.
Large construction projects are lawsuit magnets, and many recent Temple projects have encountered significant legal resistance. Among the proposed or constructed temples to be sued over:
I'm sure others exist; this is with about 20 minutes of searching a news database. Cool Hand Luke 21:04, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
I don't deny that controversies exist and that some articles are in fact Mormon-related controversies. It seems that this is not one of them for several reasons: (1) it is not an article on the controversy, (2) the controversy is not a defining characteristic of the building, (3) the category doesn't seem to cover articles that are not about controversies, and (4) the controversy over this building is more about zoning than it is about Mormonism.
A better definition of the category might resolve these problems, but for now WP:CAT says that the category should be removed. Cool Hand Luke 15:43, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
You are Mitt Romney! [Yes. Yes I am. - SESmith 02:12, 20 April 2007 (UTC)] [Thanks for your sense of humor. Cool Hand Luke 03:18, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Ok, my problem with the category is the same as what I expressed on CFD, and I think this is an appropriate border case. It might qualify, but the category is defined poorly enough that it might not. I'm willing to let this drop unless another editor still finds a problem with the category on this article. Since we all believe in controversies here, I would think another editor also disliking the label would constitute pretty good evidence that it's controversial and should stay off, at least until the category is defined better. Cool Hand Luke 01:56, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Boston Massachusetts Temple. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:29, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Boston Massachusetts Temple article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It should be pointed out that many LDS Temples are tied up in lawsuits. This is the whole reason Orin Hatch pushed through the Religious Land Use Act.
Large construction projects are lawsuit magnets, and many recent Temple projects have encountered significant legal resistance. Among the proposed or constructed temples to be sued over:
I'm sure others exist; this is with about 20 minutes of searching a news database. Cool Hand Luke 21:04, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
I don't deny that controversies exist and that some articles are in fact Mormon-related controversies. It seems that this is not one of them for several reasons: (1) it is not an article on the controversy, (2) the controversy is not a defining characteristic of the building, (3) the category doesn't seem to cover articles that are not about controversies, and (4) the controversy over this building is more about zoning than it is about Mormonism.
A better definition of the category might resolve these problems, but for now WP:CAT says that the category should be removed. Cool Hand Luke 15:43, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
You are Mitt Romney! [Yes. Yes I am. - SESmith 02:12, 20 April 2007 (UTC)] [Thanks for your sense of humor. Cool Hand Luke 03:18, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Ok, my problem with the category is the same as what I expressed on CFD, and I think this is an appropriate border case. It might qualify, but the category is defined poorly enough that it might not. I'm willing to let this drop unless another editor still finds a problem with the category on this article. Since we all believe in controversies here, I would think another editor also disliking the label would constitute pretty good evidence that it's controversial and should stay off, at least until the category is defined better. Cool Hand Luke 01:56, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Boston Massachusetts Temple. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:29, 6 November 2016 (UTC)