This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints 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 |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19Auto-archiving period: 3 months |
This page is not a forum for general discussion about personal beliefs, nor for engaging in apologetics/ polemics. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about personal beliefs, nor for engaging in apologetics/ polemics at the Reference desk. |
Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments, look in the archives, and review the FAQ before commenting. |
Frequently asked questions Q: Why is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints called a "Christian denomination"?
A: There is a
consensus that reliable academic sources generally agree the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is a Christian denomination. Q: "Mormon" is outdated, why does the article still use it even though members of the faith request it not be used?
A: The word "Mormon" is frequently used by reliable sources to describe members of the faith, and there is a consensus to continue using it until that changes. |
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has been listed as one of the Philosophy and religion good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This
level-5 vital article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Other talk page banners | |||||||
|
I just did a detailed review on the pending changes added by Leavittja and ultimately reverted them (aside from one sentence that I partially restored), but I would like to note a few things that deserve further discussion.
Leavittja removed that Joseph Smith and Brigham Young both made statements in support of Black enslavement and replaced it by saying they both supported abolition of slavery. I was able to verify that they both made statements in support of slavery, and that Smith later supported the abolition of slavery in his 1844 presidential campaign. I could not find where a source says Young supported the abolition of slavery. Takeaway: we should probably add somewhere that Smith supported the abolition of slavery in his presidential campaign.
Leavittja additionally added a sentence directly after their statement that they both supported abolition, saying "This often led to massive outrage among pro-slavery advocates in the 1800s.
" I was unable to verify this with the book source used (The Mormon Church and Blacks: A Documentary History) as I do not have access to it, but it doesn't look like the book says that from what I can gather using Google Book's preview.
Leavittja also changed that slavery was legalized in Utah when Brigham Young was governor to say that it was legalized by him amidst national political tension. I could not verify this with the sources used, but it sounds plausible.
If anyone can provide sources to verify these claims, that would be much appreciated. Even better if you can provide a quote from a source that directly verifies it. –– FormalDude (talk) 05:13, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
My edit was reverted. I added The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to Category:Anti-abortion movement in the United States which seems acceptable. The challenge is: “ Church policy permits abortion in certain cases” which if properly researched, accounts for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints being 1% against abortion. Here is the citation: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/05/24/rape-and-incest-account-few-abortions-so-why-all-attention/1211175001/ First sentence: “ Just 1% of women obtain an abortion because they became pregnant through rape, and less than 0.5% do so because of incest, according to the Guttmacher Institute.” Thus, The Church of Jesus Christ of Ladder-day Saints are 99% against abortion, meaning, it should most certainly be represented. Twillisjr ( talk) 15:44, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
@ Jgstokes @ Glman I noticed that you two have been deleting and restoring the same passage of text over the past few days. Let's talk it out here rather than continue to edit war. NW1223< Howl at me• My hunts> 02:04, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
Left guide ( talk) 07:51, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Church members believe to receive eternal life, they must "come unto Christ" [1] and assist in God's work by living the gospel of Jesus Christ, caring for those in need, inviting all to receive the gospel, and uniting families for eternity. [2]
References
Reletively Recently, the church made a statement in support of the lgbtq movement, can someone please look into including this in the article, and find some secondary sources about this. Not a kitsune ( talk) 16:56, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
As noted on the peer review, the lead in this article does not reflect the page content, which as around 40% content on criticisms of the church, where the lead has about two sentences. AIUI to meet GA criteria, the page should reflect the Manual of Style for the Lead section, which states that "The lead section should briefly summarize the most important points covered in an article in such a way that it can stand on its own as a concise version of the article."
As of present, the imbalance of the lead also violates NPOV, by de-emphasising the criticisms in relation to the sources, as reflected in the body of the page. Jim Killock (talk) 13:13, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
The name Mormon Church is inaccurate, confusing, and disrespectful to the members of the church. Why not use the actual name which the church identifies with, rather than insist on using a nickname that the church rejects? Truth971 ( talk) 14:47, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
@Trevdna, Regarding this, my gut says it's more than can be dismissed as WP:Recentism. Two days after the SLTribune article used as a source in the above edit, the NYTimes picked up the story. Link to NYTimes story (There's also a copy on Yahoo News that's less likely to be paywalled.) ~ Awilley ( talk) 19:59, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
The LDS rejects many of the key beleifs that make Christianity as we know it today. If you ask Christians from any of the major or early denominations, especially if you ask religious leaders from these denominations, they will reject that this group follows Christianity. I have seen some religious maps representing the Mormons in a separate category, apart from Christians. KeymasterOne ( talk) 12:56, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
How could they be Christians if most of these churches, encompassing the clear majority of the world's Christian population all reject the Mormon theology?This is where you are getting into your own personal opinions even if you don't realize it. The majority of religious scholars (again, summarizing what reliable sources say is what we do) define this as a Christian denomination. Again, listen to what other people are saying in the archives of this talk page. This information does not contradict that other denominations have their own interpretations on theology and the approach taken in this article is consistent with our policy on a neutral point of view. A Wikipedia article isn't going to tell you that any religion is the true one or that others are false. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 15:45, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
I reverted a recent change that switched the classification from "Restorationist" to "New Religious Movement". The argument was made that "Restorationist" isn't a classification. However, at Christian denomination#Major branches, Restorationism was listed as one of the six main groups into which Christianity can be divided. While NRM and Restorationist are not mutually exclusive (there are overlaps), the classification "Restorationist" is more informative and more inline with how the classification parameter is used on other Christian church pages. I also did a scan of Christian churches/groups in List of new religious movements that use this infobox, and the majority founded after 1830 do not list NRM as its classification (I think I found only one or two that listed NRM). - FyzixFighter ( talk) 01:06, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
This Restorationist church has its origins in nineteenth-century America, and this identity persists[1] is a straightforward identification of the denomination as "restorationist" in a comfortably non-religious academic context. Hydrangeans ( she/her | talk | edits) 15:24, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
I've never seen Pentacostalism referred to as an NRM—From the first page of Google results for "Pentecostalism AND New Religious Movement":
Pentcostalism is a relatively new religious movement, having its beginnings, most authorities say, in 1901(The West Virginia Encyclopedia, West Virginia Humanities Council, last revised August 8, 2023). From a GoogleScholar search:
New members of three NRMs in Germany (a Pentecostal parish, the New Apostolic Church, Jehovah’s Witnesses;(Nova Religio: The Journal of Alternative and Emergent Religions, February 2008).
some infoboxes have up to a half dozen—While other articles might list half a dozen categories, MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE reminds us to keep infoboxes brief where possible. Listing in the infobox the most precise and relevant category—"Christian restorationist" (placing the denomination in context with other restorationist denominations, like the Disciples of Christ and Jehovah's Witnesses) is more informative than "NRM". Hydrangeans ( she/her | talk | edits) 18:49, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
References
Hydrangeans ( she/her | talk | edits) 15:24, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
I would like to seek WP:CONSENSUS on some good faith edits that were made by mikeblas recently before I try to undo them. This page says "Do not attempt to remove the words "Mormon" or "LDS" from the page" yet "Main article" and "See also" wikilinks were changed from saying LDS Church to Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, changes which I believe are in violation of that policy.
For example, the "Demographics" subsection wikilinks now say:
"Main articles: Demographics of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Membership statistics of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and Membership history of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints"
Previously it stated (and I propose it should be returned to say something like):
"Main articles: Demographics of the LDS Church, Membership statistics of the LDS Church, and Membership history of the LDS Church"
As can be seen here, it's much more concise while still being clear when it just says "LDS Church" in the multiple wikilinks. By restating a lengthy title that has an already defined LDS initialism the article is being unnecessarily redundant (and the article itself is arguably already wordy). I believe it would lead to less visual clutter to shorten all the wikilinks on this page following when "LDS Church" is defined, and to restore the wikilinks to how they were before the initialism LDS was removed. I understand wanting to list the full article titles, but in this case it gets cumbersome and unnecessary when it's done over 30 times in the article's wikilinks. Thoughts anyone? Pastelitodepapa ( talk) 05:30, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Acronyms should be used in a page name if the subject is known primarily by its abbreviation and that abbreviation is primarily associated with the subject. -- Mikeblas ( talk) 15:05, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints 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 |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19Auto-archiving period: 3 months |
This page is not a forum for general discussion about personal beliefs, nor for engaging in apologetics/ polemics. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about personal beliefs, nor for engaging in apologetics/ polemics at the Reference desk. |
Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments, look in the archives, and review the FAQ before commenting. |
Frequently asked questions Q: Why is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints called a "Christian denomination"?
A: There is a
consensus that reliable academic sources generally agree the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is a Christian denomination. Q: "Mormon" is outdated, why does the article still use it even though members of the faith request it not be used?
A: The word "Mormon" is frequently used by reliable sources to describe members of the faith, and there is a consensus to continue using it until that changes. |
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has been listed as one of the Philosophy and religion good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This
level-5 vital article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Other talk page banners | |||||||
|
I just did a detailed review on the pending changes added by Leavittja and ultimately reverted them (aside from one sentence that I partially restored), but I would like to note a few things that deserve further discussion.
Leavittja removed that Joseph Smith and Brigham Young both made statements in support of Black enslavement and replaced it by saying they both supported abolition of slavery. I was able to verify that they both made statements in support of slavery, and that Smith later supported the abolition of slavery in his 1844 presidential campaign. I could not find where a source says Young supported the abolition of slavery. Takeaway: we should probably add somewhere that Smith supported the abolition of slavery in his presidential campaign.
Leavittja additionally added a sentence directly after their statement that they both supported abolition, saying "This often led to massive outrage among pro-slavery advocates in the 1800s.
" I was unable to verify this with the book source used (The Mormon Church and Blacks: A Documentary History) as I do not have access to it, but it doesn't look like the book says that from what I can gather using Google Book's preview.
Leavittja also changed that slavery was legalized in Utah when Brigham Young was governor to say that it was legalized by him amidst national political tension. I could not verify this with the sources used, but it sounds plausible.
If anyone can provide sources to verify these claims, that would be much appreciated. Even better if you can provide a quote from a source that directly verifies it. –– FormalDude (talk) 05:13, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
My edit was reverted. I added The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to Category:Anti-abortion movement in the United States which seems acceptable. The challenge is: “ Church policy permits abortion in certain cases” which if properly researched, accounts for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints being 1% against abortion. Here is the citation: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/05/24/rape-and-incest-account-few-abortions-so-why-all-attention/1211175001/ First sentence: “ Just 1% of women obtain an abortion because they became pregnant through rape, and less than 0.5% do so because of incest, according to the Guttmacher Institute.” Thus, The Church of Jesus Christ of Ladder-day Saints are 99% against abortion, meaning, it should most certainly be represented. Twillisjr ( talk) 15:44, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
@ Jgstokes @ Glman I noticed that you two have been deleting and restoring the same passage of text over the past few days. Let's talk it out here rather than continue to edit war. NW1223< Howl at me• My hunts> 02:04, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
Left guide ( talk) 07:51, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Church members believe to receive eternal life, they must "come unto Christ" [1] and assist in God's work by living the gospel of Jesus Christ, caring for those in need, inviting all to receive the gospel, and uniting families for eternity. [2]
References
Reletively Recently, the church made a statement in support of the lgbtq movement, can someone please look into including this in the article, and find some secondary sources about this. Not a kitsune ( talk) 16:56, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
As noted on the peer review, the lead in this article does not reflect the page content, which as around 40% content on criticisms of the church, where the lead has about two sentences. AIUI to meet GA criteria, the page should reflect the Manual of Style for the Lead section, which states that "The lead section should briefly summarize the most important points covered in an article in such a way that it can stand on its own as a concise version of the article."
As of present, the imbalance of the lead also violates NPOV, by de-emphasising the criticisms in relation to the sources, as reflected in the body of the page. Jim Killock (talk) 13:13, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
The name Mormon Church is inaccurate, confusing, and disrespectful to the members of the church. Why not use the actual name which the church identifies with, rather than insist on using a nickname that the church rejects? Truth971 ( talk) 14:47, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
@Trevdna, Regarding this, my gut says it's more than can be dismissed as WP:Recentism. Two days after the SLTribune article used as a source in the above edit, the NYTimes picked up the story. Link to NYTimes story (There's also a copy on Yahoo News that's less likely to be paywalled.) ~ Awilley ( talk) 19:59, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
The LDS rejects many of the key beleifs that make Christianity as we know it today. If you ask Christians from any of the major or early denominations, especially if you ask religious leaders from these denominations, they will reject that this group follows Christianity. I have seen some religious maps representing the Mormons in a separate category, apart from Christians. KeymasterOne ( talk) 12:56, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
How could they be Christians if most of these churches, encompassing the clear majority of the world's Christian population all reject the Mormon theology?This is where you are getting into your own personal opinions even if you don't realize it. The majority of religious scholars (again, summarizing what reliable sources say is what we do) define this as a Christian denomination. Again, listen to what other people are saying in the archives of this talk page. This information does not contradict that other denominations have their own interpretations on theology and the approach taken in this article is consistent with our policy on a neutral point of view. A Wikipedia article isn't going to tell you that any religion is the true one or that others are false. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 15:45, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
I reverted a recent change that switched the classification from "Restorationist" to "New Religious Movement". The argument was made that "Restorationist" isn't a classification. However, at Christian denomination#Major branches, Restorationism was listed as one of the six main groups into which Christianity can be divided. While NRM and Restorationist are not mutually exclusive (there are overlaps), the classification "Restorationist" is more informative and more inline with how the classification parameter is used on other Christian church pages. I also did a scan of Christian churches/groups in List of new religious movements that use this infobox, and the majority founded after 1830 do not list NRM as its classification (I think I found only one or two that listed NRM). - FyzixFighter ( talk) 01:06, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
This Restorationist church has its origins in nineteenth-century America, and this identity persists[1] is a straightforward identification of the denomination as "restorationist" in a comfortably non-religious academic context. Hydrangeans ( she/her | talk | edits) 15:24, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
I've never seen Pentacostalism referred to as an NRM—From the first page of Google results for "Pentecostalism AND New Religious Movement":
Pentcostalism is a relatively new religious movement, having its beginnings, most authorities say, in 1901(The West Virginia Encyclopedia, West Virginia Humanities Council, last revised August 8, 2023). From a GoogleScholar search:
New members of three NRMs in Germany (a Pentecostal parish, the New Apostolic Church, Jehovah’s Witnesses;(Nova Religio: The Journal of Alternative and Emergent Religions, February 2008).
some infoboxes have up to a half dozen—While other articles might list half a dozen categories, MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE reminds us to keep infoboxes brief where possible. Listing in the infobox the most precise and relevant category—"Christian restorationist" (placing the denomination in context with other restorationist denominations, like the Disciples of Christ and Jehovah's Witnesses) is more informative than "NRM". Hydrangeans ( she/her | talk | edits) 18:49, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
References
Hydrangeans ( she/her | talk | edits) 15:24, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
I would like to seek WP:CONSENSUS on some good faith edits that were made by mikeblas recently before I try to undo them. This page says "Do not attempt to remove the words "Mormon" or "LDS" from the page" yet "Main article" and "See also" wikilinks were changed from saying LDS Church to Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, changes which I believe are in violation of that policy.
For example, the "Demographics" subsection wikilinks now say:
"Main articles: Demographics of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Membership statistics of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and Membership history of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints"
Previously it stated (and I propose it should be returned to say something like):
"Main articles: Demographics of the LDS Church, Membership statistics of the LDS Church, and Membership history of the LDS Church"
As can be seen here, it's much more concise while still being clear when it just says "LDS Church" in the multiple wikilinks. By restating a lengthy title that has an already defined LDS initialism the article is being unnecessarily redundant (and the article itself is arguably already wordy). I believe it would lead to less visual clutter to shorten all the wikilinks on this page following when "LDS Church" is defined, and to restore the wikilinks to how they were before the initialism LDS was removed. I understand wanting to list the full article titles, but in this case it gets cumbersome and unnecessary when it's done over 30 times in the article's wikilinks. Thoughts anyone? Pastelitodepapa ( talk) 05:30, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Acronyms should be used in a page name if the subject is known primarily by its abbreviation and that abbreviation is primarily associated with the subject. -- Mikeblas ( talk) 15:05, 26 April 2024 (UTC)