Talk:LDS edition of the Bible
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the LDS edition of the Bible article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
External links modified
[edit]Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on LDS edition of the Bible. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131021201938/http://byustudies.byu.edu/PDFLibrary/22.4MatthewsNew-243a3c54-c987-4c57-96ab-d0aebfd094b7.pdf to http://byustudies.byu.edu/PDFLibrary/22.4MatthewsNew-243a3c54-c987-4c57-96ab-d0aebfd094b7.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:34, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
[edit]The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:51, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
Reverting without answers
[edit]Does someone has a problem with this edition? If someone has we can talk about it. Someone keeps reverting it but when I try to talk with him about it he doesn't answer my arguments. Disappointing. Furawi (talk) 04:03, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
- As I said on your talk page, the bold text at the top of the article is traditionally just the name of the article. There's no reason to also bold the entire name of the church.
- Also, there is nothing uniquely "Holy" about the LDS edition of the Bible, and it's kind of weird to put that honorific in Wikipedia's voice. Like how we don't call the Pope "His Holiness" on Wikipedia even though that's a traditional title for him. ~Awilley (talk) 14:43, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
- You mean my talk page where you didn't answered? But the name of the article is also wrong, but I can't do anything in that, but "LDS" is bold because the meaning is "the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints", thus the name of the Church is fine to be in bold. The entry "The LDS edition of the Bible is a version of the Bible published by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints..." is not good because implies that the readers know what LDS means.
- "Holy Bible" is the name that the Church uses to publish it, this is not an honorific term is just an own name. Furawi (talk) 22:26, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
- I think readers will be smart enough to make the connection that "LDS" stands for "Latter Day Saint" in the sentence "The LDS edition of the Bible is a version of the Bible published by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints". In any case, that's better then "The Holy Bible is a version of the Bible published by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" because that's quite misleading. There are lots of versions of the Bible called "Holy Bible" that are not published by the LDS Church. [1] [2] [3] ~Awilley (talk) 06:37, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Awilley No, is not better than that but I already mentioned that the text would be "The Holy Bible, published by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is a version of the Bible..." notice "is a version" (as I already mentioned this before; I'm not implying that the Church is the only publisher), again it doesn't matter if you think the readers will be smart enough or not, the Church does not publish "LDS edition of the Bible". Furawi (talk) 02:44, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Would you be willing to solicit a 3rd opinion at WP:3O? ~Awilley (talk) 04:10, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Sure. Furawi (talk) 20:51, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- And the basis of our dispute is whether or not the bold text in the first sentence should say, "The LDS edition of the Bible..." (my preferred version) vs. something that begins with "The Holy Bible", like, "The Holy Bible, published by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is a version of the Bible..." Correct? (It helps at 3O if you can concisely sum up the dispute.) Side note: I think it would help your case if you came up with something that didn't involve having bolded wikilinks. ~Awilley (talk) 21:09, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- The Holy Bible, published by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is a version of the Bible distributed by the LDS Church (informally known) in English, Spanish, Portuguese, and many other languages. Furawi (talk) 22:17, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- And the basis of our dispute is whether or not the bold text in the first sentence should say, "The LDS edition of the Bible..." (my preferred version) vs. something that begins with "The Holy Bible", like, "The Holy Bible, published by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is a version of the Bible..." Correct? (It helps at 3O if you can concisely sum up the dispute.) Side note: I think it would help your case if you came up with something that didn't involve having bolded wikilinks. ~Awilley (talk) 21:09, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Sure. Furawi (talk) 20:51, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Would you be willing to solicit a 3rd opinion at WP:3O? ~Awilley (talk) 04:10, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Awilley No, is not better than that but I already mentioned that the text would be "The Holy Bible, published by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is a version of the Bible..." notice "is a version" (as I already mentioned this before; I'm not implying that the Church is the only publisher), again it doesn't matter if you think the readers will be smart enough or not, the Church does not publish "LDS edition of the Bible". Furawi (talk) 02:44, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- I think readers will be smart enough to make the connection that "LDS" stands for "Latter Day Saint" in the sentence "The LDS edition of the Bible is a version of the Bible published by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints". In any case, that's better then "The Holy Bible is a version of the Bible published by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" because that's quite misleading. There are lots of versions of the Bible called "Holy Bible" that are not published by the LDS Church. [1] [2] [3] ~Awilley (talk) 06:37, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- Start-Class Christianity articles
- Low-importance Christianity articles
- Start-Class Bible articles
- Low-importance Bible articles
- WikiProject Bible articles
- WikiProject Christianity articles
- Start-Class Latter Day Saint movement articles
- High-importance Latter Day Saint movement articles
- WikiProject Latter Day Saint movement articles