Talk:Young Men (organization)

message: Thanks for creating this and the Young Women's article.  WBardwin 00:07, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thanks 

message: BUT-- YMO and YWO serve young adults through age 17, until their eighteenth birthday.  If we say "18", we imply they participate during their 18th year.  Accurate information is reflected in the body of both articles, so the introduction is contradictory.  Official web site or not -- I would say the article should reflect the program guidelines.  Best .......WBardwin 09:54, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The article explicitly states that a young man who is 18 will remain in the program if he is, for example, still in high school. It is designed for 12 to 18 year olds. It is not an automatic exit at age 18, and church manuals make this clear, as does the official website. Besides, who are we to change the official goals and purposes of the organization? If they say their goals and purpose are also to help 18 year olds, their goals and purposes are to help 18 year olds! Incidentally, "their 18th year" would mean they are 17 years old, so I'm not sure what you're getting at with that usage. -SESmith 10:01, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Age Range

message: I can't find any source where this organization is actually referred to as the Young Men Organization (large-O). In the LDS Church it seems to be simply referred to as "Young Men", the "Young Men auxiliary", or the "Young Men organization" (small-o).. I propose a move, with several possibilities:
*Young Men auxiliary
*Young Men organization
*Young Men (organization)
*Young Men (LDS Church)
Young Men should probably be avoided due to its inherent ambiguity.
I would lean towards Young Men auxiliary or Young Men (organization), but before I performed the move or added a specific tag I wanted to hear if others had any thoughts. Ubi Terrarum 05:26, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think Young Men (organization) is the best of these. "Auxiliary" is probably too arcane a term to be used as a disambiguation term. Organization should be in brackets if it is not part of the official name. Rich Uncle Skeleton (talk) 09:14, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed move

message: I'm working on a Duty to God article to detail the program comparable to the Personal Progress article. If you're interested in joining, please edit it at User:DavidBailey/Duty_to_God. Thanks. DavidBailey (talk) 12:15, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd be happy to help. However, the page seems to be moved from the location given. --Jgstokes-We can disagree without being disagreeable (talk) 01:08, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It has been recreated at Duty to God Award. Thanks for your assistance. DavidBailey (talk) 04:57, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: David, the article in question is on my watchlist. I will keep an eye on it and contribute when I feel it is necessary. Thank you. --Jgstokes-We can disagree without being disagreeable (talk) 23:34, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Duty to God

message: Recommend merging Aaronic Priesthood MIA Young Women into the history section of this article as significant overlap and multiple individual articles gives undue weight. Deaddebate (talk) 19:01, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal 

message: I noticed that one of the founders, B. Morris Young, isn't mentioned in the article.  Any suggestions on how to best include his contributions in the text?  Presumably in the History section?  Useight (talk) 16:44, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: No mention of one of the founders