Talk:Kingdom Hall

message: I have moved the article back to "Kingdom Hall". The article was previously moved by User:Mikhailov Kusserow to "Kingdom Hall of Jehovah's Witnesses" without consensus (twice the same day, after being reverted User:Alexander Moritz), with the claim that "A Real Name. I have been changed it to all Wikipedia" .
Per WP:NAME, the current name is concise, only as precise as it needs to be, and is the common name. Jehovah's Witnesses' Watchtower Library CD uses the term "Kingdom Hall" nearly 7000 times, but "Kingdom Hall of Jehovah's Witnesses" only about 200 times.--Jeffro77 (talk) 23:03, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article name 

message: I suggest to place one of the best image at the top as It was before. See the Church (building) article for example. Only extra images are placed at gallery--Logical Thinker:talk 11:18, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I moved it to balance the gap left by a building that is not actually a Kingdom Hall.--Jeffro77 (talk) 11:36, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Gallery

message: I have moved the second 'meeting' picture into the Uses section. However, it would add a little more balance if one of those 'meeting' pictures were removed and a picture relevant to construction (e.g. a half-built KH) were placed in the Construction section instead.--Jeffro77 (talk) 10:08, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Images

message: the phrase "Kingdom Hall" is an almost exact translation of the Latin (from Greek) basilica, the hall where royal business was conducted.  Is this a coincidence?  --199.91.207.3 (talk) 22:05, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It is probably a coincidence. Even if it is not, there would need to be a reliable source to mention it in the article.--Jeffro77 (talk) 07:50, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  origin of "Kingdom Hall" 

message: There seems to be some notable dispute over the subject of whether Kingdom Halls are or are not built with a specific room dedicated to be used for child discipline. Some sources, such as http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Spanking-Room-Jehovahs-Witnesses/dp/1579219659 seem to indicate this, but word of mouth such as http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/bible/196639/1/The-spanking-room seem to make the subject disputable. Perhaps it is worth mentioning, if someone could post a more erudite segment about it or two? Justin.Parallax (talk) 19:21, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spanking Room 

message: According to info I got from an elder, blue JW.ORG-signs are going to be a global policy. For meanwhile how about like this:
:JW-ORG -signs
:To advertice society's website, blue JW.ORG -signs are going to be added on visible place outside kingdom halls from mid 2014s.(etc)
--Russellin teekannu (talk) 16:58, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Your suggested text, which has no official source, would be promotional and is therefore inappropriate. 'Info you got from an elder' does not constitute a reliable source.--Jeffro77 (talk) 08:16, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: How about images of K-Halls with signs on? So far Ive seen jw.org sign in every one ive passed? (in Finland&Sweden)--Russellin teekannu (talk) 06:27, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: That sounds like original research. Images of halls you've seen isn't evidence of a "global policy", which would require a specific source.--Jeffro77 (talk) 11:49, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: According to Our Kingdom Ministry (April 2009, page 4): "Congregations or individuals should not use logos or names of the organization’s legal entities, or variations thereof, on their Kingdom Halls, signs, letterhead, personal objects, and so forth. Such use of the organization’s logos may cause confusion for public officials, publishers, and others about the legal affiliation of the congregation with the organization’s legal entities." It is entirely possible that they have started doing so since then, but I am not aware of any source to support the claim.--Jeffro77 (talk) 12:32, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, even in our k-hall there was a "Watchtower" sign on the wall (and still is painted on inside walls). "Watchtower"-sign was even used when pointing route to summer assemblies. I remember it was said there is no point to start painting those over until next uplifting of the k-hall. ("Watchtower"(tm) is a registered trademark). But about the Jw.org signs, so far a've been visiting different places, all have had it on their wall. Took even pictures, shoud I upload them to Commons?Russellin teekannu (talk) 19:26, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: There is nothing stopping you uploading your photos, but your personal photos do not constitute a reliable source, nor do they constitute evidence of any policy.--Jeffro77 (talk) 07:25, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

text: A picture is not an indication of a policy. It is only evidence that some halls have signs. Unless you can cite a source indicating a policy, you may as well stop making the assertion.--Jeffro77 (talk) 08:10, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

text: It is also unremarkable for a building associated with an organisation to have the organisation's logo on it. It is not appropriate to try to promote the website here.--Jeffro77 (talk) 08:14, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  JW.ORG -signs