Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Latter Day Saints

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Latter Day Saint movement (Rated Project-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This page 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.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This page has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

(Latter-Day Saints) vs (LDS Church) Parentheticals[edit]

There is a discussion on (Latter-Day Saints) vs (LDS Church) Parentheticals going on at Naming conventions (Latter Day Saints) caused by an issue with President of the Church vs. President of the Church (LDS Church) (caused by Talk:President_of_the_Church#Page_move). I would suggest that those people who work on this page alot, chime in.--ARTEST4ECHO (talk/contribs) 17:28, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Capitalization of the word "The"[edit]

Again this issue has come up. User:Beyond My Ken has just reverted 30 insistence where pages have incorrectly used "the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" when "THE" is per MOS:LDS and WP:THE, "The" is part of the legal name of this sect and should be capitalized. "Beyond My Ken" dosn't want to talk to me about it anymore, so I'm taking it up here. WP:THE reads,

When a proper name is almost always used with capitalized "The", especially if it is included by unofficial sources, the article "The" should be used in the name of the corresponding Wikipedia page as well. For instance, this is true for the names of some musical groups:

Additionally, Wikipedia:THE#Other_proper_names even used The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as an example.

Besides the above-mentioned cases, "The" is sometimes used at the beginning of some other proper names:

Clearly Beyond My Ken is wrong, but per another uses suggestions "a broader community input on the question" should be used. So here it is. --ARTEST4ECHO (talk) 14:58, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

  • Comment I'm not ready yet to voice an opinion on the matter as I'd like first to understand the different arguments and perspectives. But Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Capital letters#Institutions may also inform the discussion. Let us keep in mind that matters of style rise to the level of guidelines, not policy, and thus should be treated with some flexibility. If a particular usage is awkward in context even if a manual of style supports it, alternative styles should be open for consideration. alanyst 15:59, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Agree I think it is pretty clear that the "The" should be included and capitalized. The Wikipedia guideline on this has been consistent for years, and I think it is a cut and dry case, given that the LDS Church itself always includes the article as part of the full formal name, and capitalizes it. COGDEN 04:07, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Agree. I thought that this was a fairly settled issue and non-controversial; perhaps not. But per the guidelines, both general (WP:THE) and specific (WP:LDSMOS), I think that "The" should usually be included and capitalized. There might be some situations where it is not included, but those would be rare--one I can think of is if we were referring to the LDS Church as being based in Utah, it might make more sense to write "the Utah-based Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" than "the Utah-based The Church of ...". But I think that's an example of the exception and is not the general rule here. Good Ol’factory (talk) 05:14, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose Nah, not that important. I see no real reason to capitalize "the" in every instance.--Mark Miller (talk) 06:02, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose You folks need to read WP:walled garden. BMK (talk) 06:05, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
@Beyond My Ken: I think I understand what you're trying to say here, but I don't think WP:Walled garden says what you think it says. ~Adjwilley (talk) 01:57, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
@Adjwilley: You're right. It's been some time since I read it, and I recalled it as being more generalized and therefore applicable here. I think you understand the point I was trying to make, that MOS LDS is essentially controlled by advocates of that organization, and therefore the "consensus" that prevails here is not a true reflection of the broader community's feelings. I don't know if there's another WP page that expresses that. BMK (talk) 22:26, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
I agree with BMK. It opens with: "This Wikipedia Manual of Style supplement has been created through the efforts and broad consensus of contributors to WikiProject Latter Day Saint movement." Then it says to follow "these conventions" so that articles are "neutral". Riiiiight. This is inappropriate as a "supplement" to MOS, and should be transferred to a supplement of the WikiProject Latter day what. Tony (talk) 03:30, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose—We see this ebullient insistence on a weirdly capped "T" in the middle of sentences by a few institutions out of vanity. But vanity capitalisation is disapproved of by our own house style, Chicago MOS, and the Oxford style guide New Hart's Rules. I don't know why this institution was ever allowed to have its own little corner of MOS, but it seems wrong to me. Next thing we'll have the Catholic Church wanting a MOS to itself. Tony (talk) 12:53, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
    • It's not a MOS for an "institution", it's a MOS for a religious movement, which is composed of a number of institutions, some of which have historically been, and some of which remain, fairly militantly opposed to each other, in part because all of them claim to be the successor institution to the original "Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints"—the one without the capitalized "The". One reason for the MOS for the movement was to prevent the disputes from arising time and time again in every movement-related article. It was crafted with some compromises on all sides, and it seems to have worked fairly well without having to resort to WP arbitration and the like, which have been necessary in other controversial topic areas. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:16, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Agree In this instance, use of "The" is as noted in guidelines cited by others, it is part of the church's official name. Natural and appropriate to include and capitalize "The" when identifying the church's full name. Also helpful to remember that the MOS was developed in part of help ensure that WP guidelines were established and adhered to, guiding users to maintain npov when editing. It's got nothing to do with vanity or feeling some corner of the WP world with special significance was to be carved out. ChristensenMJ (talk) 00:09, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment My impression has been that part of the reason for using a capital The in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is to help distinguish it from similarly named churches. For instance, see:
That said, these churches are all either very small or defunct, and I can see an argument for dropping the capital T on a case by case basis if it is excessively awkward grammatically. In other words, I think that the recommendation in MOS:LDS should stay, but it should be recognized that MOS:LDS is just one criteria to be weighed when we're actually writing sentences. ~Adjwilley (talk) 01:48, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose vanity caps. This is suggestive... Dicklyon (talk) 04:04, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Brief Comment What every WP editor participating here needs to remember is that the LDS church gets to chose its own name. Read their style guide publish via to see that "The" is part of their name and has been since the time Joseph Smith registered its name per governing law. Hope this helps, Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 05:08, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
    • Yes, but it doesn't get to make pronouncements on the grammar of the language. Tony (talk) 08:02, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
      • Actually the LDS Church does have the right to choose its own name and has had it for well over 170 years. More importantly, it is correct grammar because The is acknowledged as part of the title and not a demonstrative adjective. Corporate entities, groups, organizations, retail outlets, and even churches do this all the time. --StormRider 16:51, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
        • "The" is never an adjective. And they can insist on their vanity capping all they like, but as Dicklyon's linked analysis shows, a clear majority of usage (both AmEng and BrEng, if you choose each tab) is downcased. Just as people typically ignore high-handed insistence by a few universities for a The ("I attended The University of Pomposity"), this should be ignored if we're to take into consideration majority usage. Tony (talk) 17:22, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
          • "The" is never an adjective. Really? Then why does my Oxford dictionary say: "the adj. (called the definite article) 1 applied to a noun standing for a specific person or thing ..."? Of course the word "the" can be an adjective—that's how the word is usually used, as an attributive adjective that appears before a noun. The fact that it's given more specific names as well, like "article" or "definite article" doesn't change the fact that it acts adjectively and thus can correctly be referred to as an adjective. (It can also be an adverb, but that is less common.) Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:20, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Agree. This seems to get settled repeatedly until the next well-meaning individual again discovers a "The" without any knowledge of the topic and off we go again. When we go to the iTunes page we do not read Itunes; we read iTunes, why? For the same reason that when you go to the LDS church's manual of style and read the information. I suppose this would be easier if we were talking about a non-controversial topic, but all kinds of agendas seem to consistently, repeatedly come up. This is more about knowledge or the reverse, ignorance, than about a real disagreement. I tend to think with 30 minutes of reading the decision is obvious. --StormRider 06:33, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment - I don't get why this is so hard. With "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" the "The" is part of a proper noun. You always capitalize a proper name. It seems like most those that oppose this are people here just don't like how it looks or don't understand the issue. So what, it is the proper English way to write out the name of this sect.ARTEST4ECHO (talk) 16:59, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment. To me, it seems kind of weird to have this debate in the abstract. As long as The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints exists at that article name, doesn't it make sense to use wikilinks that go to that article? If users want to propose changing the article name to Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, then we could have a move discussion. I would welcome such a discussion. But what doesn't make sense to me is to change all the links to avoid the "The" when the article still uses the "The". Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:39, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
    Now that is a very good point. I don't know of any other articles on churches that begin with "the", even though one says "the Roman Catholic Church", etc. Tony (talk) 04:45, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
    There are others, currently. The Church of Jesus Christ (Bickertonite) is one. The ones that do tend to be about about churches that have explicitly adopted the "The" as part of their name due to the church attaching significance to the word's inclusion. Another is The First Church of Christ, Scientist, though that's more about a church building than an entire denomination. Good Ol’factory (talk) 10:00, 6 June 2014 (UTC)