Talk:Brigham Young

message: I agree - the POV violations are consistent in judging the man by modern standards instead of historical standards (by which Abraham Lincoln could be condemned as racist).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.72.16.25 (talk) 04:12, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: If anything, the Legacy section completely white-washes this racist, genocidal figure's failings.50.111.22.143 (talk) 08:02, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Haha no joke, this article reads like a Mormon recruitment brochure. The guy was a violent opportunist and hypocrite. Also, the whole church is based on the ridiculous lies of a grave robber.73.211.15.138 (talk) 03:51, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV discussion 

message: Are Young's nicknames in the introduction paragraph necessary? They're not really an overview of him, and it's really an obscure fact that goes down below, I'd think.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheTeaDrinker (talk • contribs) 20:01, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I went ahead and moved the nickname stuff down to the Legacy section. I kept some of the relevant information up in the lead, like the fact that he travelled with the pioneers.Cjstirlbyu (talk) 18:29, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Young's Nicknames 

message: I have begun to add more details from Thomas G. Alexander's biography of Brigham Young. The problem is my electonic copy does not include page numbers. I am not sure how to specifcy where I am finding details.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:27, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  More details and sourcing 

message: I have concerns about the addition of the "javelin" quote added here. The quote was initially included in an edit by a different editor about a month ago. I trimmed that substantial edit to keep this a summary article, cribbing wording from the actual blood atonement article and avoiding details like unnecessary exact quotes. I believe that this should still be a summary paragraph of BY's teachings on blood atonement. I still don't think that this quote adds anything to the summary. Additionally it is quoting a primary source - it would be better if this were to secondary source so that the claim that this is an example of a blood atonement. Overall, I find the quote too sensationalistic and undue weight, and I will again remove it and invite discussion on the talk page. --FyzixFighter (talk) 23:14, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I would add that the Journal of Discourses, the primary source document referenced for the javelin quote, has issues as a source. Historians have discovered that George D. Watts, the transcriber, would for reasons frankly quite unknown change the text between his shorthand transcription of a talk and the published version in the Journal. (Gerrit Dirkmaat and LaJean Purcell Carruth [2016] "The Prophets Have Spoken, but What Did They Say?" ; LaJean Purcell Carrth [August 4, 2020] "Preached vs. Published: Shorthand Record Discrepancies") As such, quotations from the Journal of Discourses, while most likely broadly reflective of the speaker's meaning, nearly always vary from the actual words used, sometimes by quite a lot (for an example, see page 25–26 from "The Prophets Have Spoken"). Weighing the evidence and parsing through what excerpts from the Journal of Discourses legitimately reflect what was said and which are more Watts than the speaker seems to me more a task for secondary sources than for us at Wikipedia. As such, I would encourage refraining from quoting directly from the Journal of Discourses. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 00:20, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  BY javelin quote 

message: hi again, I'm thinking about how to organize the information on this page. Specifically, I am wondering where would be a good place to put information about Young's proposal to Martha Brotherton and maybe some other information about his participation in polygamy. I think I will put it in the paragraph about Brigham Young's time in Nauvoo for now. But I feel like a section on Young's polygamy and proposals might be appropriate because there could be a lot of information on it (and maybe that section would also include his theological support of the practice as later church president/prophet). Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 19:25, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Best way to organize information about Brigham Young's polygamy 

message: Did Young have 56 or 57 children? It says that he had 56 wives and 57 children in the intro, but in the info box he's only listed as having 56 children.  WikidKev (talk) 22:23, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Number of children