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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Christianity 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.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Latter Day Saint movement, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Mormonism and the
Latter Day Saint movement 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.Latter Day Saint movementWikipedia:WikiProject Latter Day Saint movementTemplate:WikiProject Latter Day Saint movementLatter Day Saint movement articles
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
Actually it was moved to "The Gila Valley Arizona Temple" concurrent with the linked discussion; as you have stated, it was moved to "Gila Valley Arizona Temple" without discussion last November. I see no compelling reason why it was moved at that time and see no reason why it should not be moved back to the full, if somewhat awkward, title.— Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Shereth (
talk •
contribs)
Oppose Neither condition of
WP:THE appears to be met here. The title indicates that the subject is a temple of a geographic location (Gila Valey Arizona) that does not employ "the" in its name. The meaning does not change by removing "the" nor is there any clear indication that "the" would be capitalized in running text. The example or
The Hague Netherlands Temple is not terribly appropriate given the geographical reference is
The Hague (whose reason for including "the" are exemplified in the reference naming convention.). I also noticed that no other temple (
Category:Temples of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in the United States)in the united states employs "the" in the title.--
Labattblueboy (
talk) 23:19, 6 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Comment: I'm sorry but you are incorrect. It meets the conditions at
WP:THE. Just read the next line...
"These conditions are sometimes met if the page name is:
Clearly it meets #2 and #3. The "official or commonly used name" and "the commonly used proper name" is "The Gila Valley Arizona Temple".--
ARTEST4ECHO (
talk/
contribs) 15:58, 7 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Additionally as Shereth pointed out, it was decided back in August of 2009 that it meet
WP:THE and the "The" should be included, but User:Eustress moved it without discussion in 2011. It should be moved back.--
ARTEST4ECHO (
talk/
contribs) 16:05, 7 September 2012 (UTC)reply
The key word there is "sometimes", and I still fail to see why an exception is warranted here. If the geographical reference employed "the" I would be entirely in support. The key here is that the title does not and no other temples within the same categorical group employ "the" in the title.--
Labattblueboy (
talk) 16:33, 7 September 2012 (UTC)reply
The name of the geographical reference isn't really pertinent to this discussion, but rather the name of the subject of the article itself. ARTEST4ECHO has supplied ample evidence that the building's official name as presented on church documents includes "The" as part of the name. As you have pointed out yourself no other US temples use "The" as part of the name; the fact that this appears to be a unique case promulgated in numerous official sources seems to validate that its use is intentional rather than erroneous. As I pointed out in the previous discussion it's not our place to proofread or correct errors that the church may have made in the naming of this temple, nor is it our place to truncate part of the name because we feel it fits in a little better with the rest of them.
Shereth 18:24, 7 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Firstly, the official name (that selected by the church) is almost irrelevant, it's which name is most common amongst reliable sources. Finding independent sources was not terribly easy. An Eastern Arizona Courier article employed "The"
[1] as did KCSG
[2]. Deseret News employed lowercase
[3][4][5]. KSL is inconsistent and has employed both lowercase
[6][7] and upercase
[8]. So my observations amongst independent media is Eastern Arizona Courier, KCSG employ "The", Deseret News does not employ "The" and KSL is inconsistent. The results are not convincing enough for me to be in support. I could be convinced is a number of other media outlets, once again not church related, were shown to employ the capitalization as a preference.--
Labattblueboy (
talk) 20:20, 8 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Again, you are incorrect. Per
WP:The The official name is the only thing that is relevant.--
ARTEST4ECHO (
talk/
contribs) 12:26, 10 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Sorry to say but official name is most certainly not the only , nor likely most important, factor that is relevant. Rather, its the name selected through reliable sources, hence the news article search above. Unless you can show that independent reliable sources are employing "the" widely you don't have my support.--
Labattblueboy (
talk) 04:04, 12 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Support I see both versions of the phraseology used when referring only to the location itself, so I think the official phraseology used by the temple's church (
link) should be used here, which includes "The". I might also suggest renaming
Gila_Valley_(Graham_County). —Eustresstalk 17:50, 7 September 2012 (UTC)reply
I wouldn't go that far; USGS just calls it Gila Valley.
[9].
Shereth 18:29, 7 September 2012 (UTC)reply
What dose the USGS calling the City a different name have anything to do with the name of the temple. The official name used "The".--
ARTEST4ECHO (
talk/
contribs) 12:25, 10 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Oppose. Absolutely no need for the definite article, whether it's in the official name or not. --
Necrothesp (
talk) 09:46, 11 September 2012 (UTC)reply
So were supposed to ignore Wikipedia rules? Per
WP:THE the Offical name is ALL that is relevant so it should be included.--
ARTEST4ECHO (
talk/
contribs) 13:57, 11 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Oppose Clearly there's disagreement here over whether
WP:THE conditions are met. Count me among those who think they're not. --
BDD (
talk) 23:04, 13 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Comment It has appeared that this situation is in a "no consensus" state currently.
Hill Crest'sWikiLaser! (BOOM!) 15:32, 30 September 2012 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Christianity 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.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Latter Day Saint movement, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Mormonism and the
Latter Day Saint movement 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.Latter Day Saint movementWikipedia:WikiProject Latter Day Saint movementTemplate:WikiProject Latter Day Saint movementLatter Day Saint movement articles
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
Actually it was moved to "The Gila Valley Arizona Temple" concurrent with the linked discussion; as you have stated, it was moved to "Gila Valley Arizona Temple" without discussion last November. I see no compelling reason why it was moved at that time and see no reason why it should not be moved back to the full, if somewhat awkward, title.— Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Shereth (
talk •
contribs)
Oppose Neither condition of
WP:THE appears to be met here. The title indicates that the subject is a temple of a geographic location (Gila Valey Arizona) that does not employ "the" in its name. The meaning does not change by removing "the" nor is there any clear indication that "the" would be capitalized in running text. The example or
The Hague Netherlands Temple is not terribly appropriate given the geographical reference is
The Hague (whose reason for including "the" are exemplified in the reference naming convention.). I also noticed that no other temple (
Category:Temples of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in the United States)in the united states employs "the" in the title.--
Labattblueboy (
talk) 23:19, 6 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Comment: I'm sorry but you are incorrect. It meets the conditions at
WP:THE. Just read the next line...
"These conditions are sometimes met if the page name is:
Clearly it meets #2 and #3. The "official or commonly used name" and "the commonly used proper name" is "The Gila Valley Arizona Temple".--
ARTEST4ECHO (
talk/
contribs) 15:58, 7 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Additionally as Shereth pointed out, it was decided back in August of 2009 that it meet
WP:THE and the "The" should be included, but User:Eustress moved it without discussion in 2011. It should be moved back.--
ARTEST4ECHO (
talk/
contribs) 16:05, 7 September 2012 (UTC)reply
The key word there is "sometimes", and I still fail to see why an exception is warranted here. If the geographical reference employed "the" I would be entirely in support. The key here is that the title does not and no other temples within the same categorical group employ "the" in the title.--
Labattblueboy (
talk) 16:33, 7 September 2012 (UTC)reply
The name of the geographical reference isn't really pertinent to this discussion, but rather the name of the subject of the article itself. ARTEST4ECHO has supplied ample evidence that the building's official name as presented on church documents includes "The" as part of the name. As you have pointed out yourself no other US temples use "The" as part of the name; the fact that this appears to be a unique case promulgated in numerous official sources seems to validate that its use is intentional rather than erroneous. As I pointed out in the previous discussion it's not our place to proofread or correct errors that the church may have made in the naming of this temple, nor is it our place to truncate part of the name because we feel it fits in a little better with the rest of them.
Shereth 18:24, 7 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Firstly, the official name (that selected by the church) is almost irrelevant, it's which name is most common amongst reliable sources. Finding independent sources was not terribly easy. An Eastern Arizona Courier article employed "The"
[1] as did KCSG
[2]. Deseret News employed lowercase
[3][4][5]. KSL is inconsistent and has employed both lowercase
[6][7] and upercase
[8]. So my observations amongst independent media is Eastern Arizona Courier, KCSG employ "The", Deseret News does not employ "The" and KSL is inconsistent. The results are not convincing enough for me to be in support. I could be convinced is a number of other media outlets, once again not church related, were shown to employ the capitalization as a preference.--
Labattblueboy (
talk) 20:20, 8 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Again, you are incorrect. Per
WP:The The official name is the only thing that is relevant.--
ARTEST4ECHO (
talk/
contribs) 12:26, 10 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Sorry to say but official name is most certainly not the only , nor likely most important, factor that is relevant. Rather, its the name selected through reliable sources, hence the news article search above. Unless you can show that independent reliable sources are employing "the" widely you don't have my support.--
Labattblueboy (
talk) 04:04, 12 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Support I see both versions of the phraseology used when referring only to the location itself, so I think the official phraseology used by the temple's church (
link) should be used here, which includes "The". I might also suggest renaming
Gila_Valley_(Graham_County). —Eustresstalk 17:50, 7 September 2012 (UTC)reply
I wouldn't go that far; USGS just calls it Gila Valley.
[9].
Shereth 18:29, 7 September 2012 (UTC)reply
What dose the USGS calling the City a different name have anything to do with the name of the temple. The official name used "The".--
ARTEST4ECHO (
talk/
contribs) 12:25, 10 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Oppose. Absolutely no need for the definite article, whether it's in the official name or not. --
Necrothesp (
talk) 09:46, 11 September 2012 (UTC)reply
So were supposed to ignore Wikipedia rules? Per
WP:THE the Offical name is ALL that is relevant so it should be included.--
ARTEST4ECHO (
talk/
contribs) 13:57, 11 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Oppose Clearly there's disagreement here over whether
WP:THE conditions are met. Count me among those who think they're not. --
BDD (
talk) 23:04, 13 September 2012 (UTC)reply
Comment It has appeared that this situation is in a "no consensus" state currently.
Hill Crest'sWikiLaser! (BOOM!) 15:32, 30 September 2012 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.