Talk:Mormon missionary

message: I just reverted a good faith edit that analyzed convert baptisms.  It appears to violate WP:NOR, specifically the prohibition of "...any analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to advance a position not advanced by the sources."  72Dino (talk) 18:17, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that the edit was problematic. It appeared to be an attempt to demonstrate that the LDS Church's missionary work is stagnating and/or that it is not growing as fast as the Assemblies of God. Good Ol’factory (talk) 20:54, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Convert baptism analysis 

message: I removed :File:JBBall Gravestone.jpg (pictured right), but anon User:208.81.184.4 reverted my action (diff), arguing the image has a "direct relationship to the risks [of] missionary work -- this person was murdered on his mission, as described in the caption". However, MOS:Images states that "Images must be relevant to the article that they appear in and be significantly and directly related to the article's topic." The image by itself has no direct pertinence to the article -- the headstone doesn't say anything about the deceased person's missionary service. Therefore, I suggest the image be removed for good. —Eustress talk 22:28, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree, and thank the IP editor for finding it and adding it to the article. Before the picture there was none in the Incidents subsection. I have inserted a sentence in the section on the incident (in retrospect a notable omission, given the wide publicity it received when it occurred), and have attached its cite to the picture's caption as further explanation. Ylee (talk) 22:32, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I support Eustress's reasoning. It struck me as out-of-place and irrelevant while reading the article. St John Chrysostom Δόξατω Θεώ 07:11, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Image pertinence

message: Hello and thank you for your assistance in making the lead compliant with enwp guidelines. Here are some of my thoughts:
*I'll concede on the bolding issue in the first sentence -- it's not ideal, but I understand your concern. Perhaps someone else can suggest a superior alternative?
*Per WP:LDS, first reference to church should be "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church)".
*"Personnel" is not ideal for describing missionaries, since the word typically connotes employment (see wikt:personnel); nor are they commissioned at the mission-level -- they are called at the worldwide level and then organized geographically into missions, in a very centralized process
Regards —Eustress talk 15:56, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm still here and I've come back to read the lead once a day to try to figure out a better way of phrasing the first sentence to avoid the wikilink in the title as per MOSBOLDTITLE, but I'm still clueless. Any passers-by with a clue stick, please hit me. St John Chrysostom Δόξατω Θεώ 07:10, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Lead issues

message: Do you think this would clear WP:NOTNEWS? http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865582049/LDS-missionary-killed-in-electrical-accident-in-Guatemala.html?pg=all  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.212.9.231 (talk) 00:03, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think it belongs in the article.  There have been a number of missionaries that have died in accidents while serving.  While tragic, I don't think it's notable for an encyclopedia. Bahooka (talk) 14:21, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missionary death 

message: I added a paragraph to the History section about the lowering of the age for missionary service. It is rather historical. It is somewhat redundant, since it's mentioned in passing in other parts of the article. But I went into more detail and it was a glaring omission since before, it just ended with M. Russell Ballard's statement that the bar to qualify for missionary service had been raised. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 13:46, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not super up on this history—but how did/does the "raising the bar" relate to the changes in age? Did the change in age supercede the raising of the bar? It seemed that the raising of the bar resulted in a drop in the number of missionaries, but then the lowering of the age resulted in a surge. So has the church dropped the emphasis on raising the bar? I can't really find any sources on the relation between the two. Things seem to kind of gone quiet on raising the bar since the age change. Or am I missing something? Good Ol’factory (talk) 15:11, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Lowering the age from 20 to 19 in 1960 was also historic at the time and should be mentioned along with the more recent lowering of age requirements (see the first paragraph here.) I have not heard mention of "raising the bar" requirements since the lowering of the age, but I also have not heard of any change in those requirements. The bar is still up there where they raised it, but has not been lowered. There does not appear to be a connection between lowering the age and raising the bar unless it is in a reliable source that I have not seen. Bahooka (talk) 15:20, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think there is a relation between the two events, outside of them both relating to missionary service. But, yes, it hasn't really been discussed much since the age change. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 15:42, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

text: And I agree with  that information on the first age lowering in 1960 should be included as well, but I think it needs more research first. It would be great to get information on its impact like we have on the more recent one. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 15:44, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. Good Ol’factory (talk) 16:27, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Lowering of age

message: I reverted these edits by an anon IP user for several reasons:
* The Church does not mandate young men to serve missions. They kind of sort of used to, but not anymore. They do strongly encourage it, however, hence the revert which states that.
* Calling out how much time missionaries "work" each week and how little time they have off borders on original research and synthesis. Can the time they sleep and time for meals be considered "working"?
If you think the changes are worthy, let's discuss here first. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 20:12, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't say that this very real scenario specifically should go in the article, but our personal observations and experiences can help inform editorial choices and the weight given to certain statements. -- 208.81.184.4 (talk) 15:08, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

text: Added your refs (except uncitable refs) to "refideas" ideas above to protect against loss via archiving at some future date. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 16:13, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Jeez, looking at some of these—there's a lot that could be written about the issue. I had no idea there was so much. At least some mention of it should be in this article, I think, since so much of it is related to the mental health of potential or actual LDS missionaries. Good Ol’factory (talk) 21:39, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Questionable changes

message: Given the request for refs in the section above, here is a sample of related ones that may be of use; they are sorted by date:
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* . Reprint at jefflindsay.com.
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* . Reprinted by the Washington Post, Huffington Post, and Religion News Service.
*
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
;Undated
*
Additionally the following are not really directly citable, but still may contain useful individual articles or other information on this topic:
* http://www.thereturnedmissionary.com/
* http://www.rmguide.com/
* http://sickrms.com/
** http://sickrms.com/tag/early-return-missionary/
* http://www.earlyhomecoming.com/
* http://www.ldsability.org/disabilities/mental-illness
* http://www.mormonmentalhealth.org/
* http://www.patheos.com/blogs/mormontherapist/
* 
* 
Thanks. -- 208.81.184.4 (talk) 00:21, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Added your refs (except uncitable refs) to "refideas" ideas above to protect against loss via archiving at some future date. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 16:13, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Jeez, looking at some of these—there's a lot that could be written about the issue. I had no idea there was so much. At least some mention of it should be in this article, I think, since so much of it is related to the mental health of potential or actual LDS missionaries. Good Ol’factory (talk) 21:39, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Potential refs

message: This is bogus correct?  All MTCs have this rule? [THERE IS NO SOURCE]:
At the missionary training center, missionaries are instructed to wait directly outside of the restroom if their companion is inside.
I could not find the term "sexual" more than once, and in different context.  I could not find this on page 30?  Bogus?
The rule is also intended to defend missionaries against complaints of sexual abuse, because one companion could always serve as a witness for another companion if needed for legal purposes.
Thewhitebox (talk) 07:57, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: outside the bathroom

message: This phrase is used a few times, but without explanation.  What is it? --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 21:35, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  "preparation day" 

message: Hello again, everyone! As outlined here, there is a big difference between the updated MOS from the Church and Wikipedia's manual of style relating to articles about the Church. That said, both of those manuals of style are in agreement on one point: The full name of the Church should be used in the first reference thereunton in each article about Church-related topics. After that, abbreviations remain acceptable. Therefore, it is inappropriate for any Wikipedia user to try and incorporate the full name of the Church on every mention thereunto in every article about Church-related subjects. Post any questions on this on the talk page to which I linked above. Thank you. --Jgstokes (talk) 18:58, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: "thereunton?" TravellerDMT-07 (talk) 02:15, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updated Church MOS vs. Wikipedia LDS MOS 

message: Hello again, everyone! In looking over this page just now, the usage of the term "alumni" in one of the subsection headings caught my attention. The textbook definition of that term doesn't seem to me to be a good fit for our purposes here, so I decided to be bold and change the term in question to "prominent RMs". This is just a placeholder for now, and I welcome any input on any further tweaks. But i don't think employing the term "alumni" is appropriate here. That term seems to indicate that once their missionary labors were concluded, their role as missionaries came to a permanent end. And Church leaders have stressed that every member should involve themselves in missionary work, with or without a formal full-time call as such. So to say they are instead prominent returned missionaries to me better captures the intended notion. Just my own thoughts, for what they may be worth. Does anyone else have any opinion on this issue? Thanks. --Jgstokes (talk) 23:52, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: the only thing that I have to comment is that perhaps it could be changed to "Prominent Returned Missionaries." RM is fine, but maybe it isn't the best to use an acronym in a section heading. Rollidan (talk) 15:48, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changes just made (Alumni vs. Prominent RMs) 

message: In the WP:NCLDS, it states in the section Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(Latter_Day_Saints)#Articles_about_a_single_denomination that: "Articles about only one Latter Day Saint denomination should use the full name of the denomination as it exists on the denomination's Wikipedia page".  I almost reverted Johnpacklambert's edit, but feel that it was justified after reading the MOS, as this article is about a single denomination. My recommendation is that it be reverted back to Johnpacklambert's title, using the full name of the LDS church. Epachamo (talk) 15:07, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent changes to the article title (LDS Church) vs. (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints)