The Rock Springs massacre occurred in 1885 in the present-day United States city of
Rock Springs, Wyoming. The riot, and resulting massacre of
immigrant Chinese miners by
white immigrant miners, was the result of racial prejudice toward the Chinese miners, who were perceived to be taking jobs from the white miners. The
Union Pacific Coal Department found it economically beneficial to give preference in hiring to Chinese miners, who were willing to work for lower wages than their white counterparts, angering the white miners. When the rioting ended, at least 28 Chinese miners were dead and 15 were injured. Rioters burned 78 Chinese homes, resulting in approximately $150,000 in property damage (equal to $5.09 million in 2020 terms). The massacre in Rock Springs touched off a wave of anti-Chinese violence, especially in the
Puget Sound area of
Washington Territory.Artwork credit:
Thure de Thulstrup; restored by
Adam Cuerden
Following consensus at the
2021 RfA review, the autopatrolled user right
has been removed from the administrators user group; admins can grant themselves the autopatrolled permission if they wish to remain autopatrolled.
The
functionaries email list (functionaries-enlists.wikimedia.org) will no longer accept incoming emails apart from those sent by list members and WMF staff. Private concerns, apart from those requiring oversight, should be directly sent to
the Arbitration Committee.
You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.
When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.
Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on
better tools to help.
We have
two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can
let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.
There's an editor who has repeatedly violated the 24-hour BRD sanction at the Racial Views of Donald Trump article. The same editor has been making problematic edits at other BLP and Politics-related articles. I opened a thread at the user's talk page
here trying to explain the problem and asking for them to correct it, but this does not seem to be sinking in. Next time you have a chance, could you have a look and do as you see fit? I'm not inclined to file an AE complaint, but the behavior does need to stop. Thanks.
SPECIFICOtalk 19:26, 11 January 2022 (UTC)reply
@
SPECIFICO: Sorry I missed you. (Traveling) It looks like you got this resolved in a different way at SPI. ~
Awilley (
talk) 23:38, 13 January 2022 (UTC)reply
All's well thanks for the note.
SPECIFICOtalk 00:39, 14 January 2022 (UTC)reply
Discretionary sanctions topic area changes
In a process that began last year with
WP:DS2021, the Arbitration Committee is evaluating
Discretionary Sanctions (DS) in order to improve it. A larger package of reforms is slated for sometime this year. From the work done so far, it became clear a number of areas may no longer need DS or that some DS areas may be overly broad.
The topics proposed for revocation are:
Senkaku islands
Waldorf education
Ancient Egyptian race controversy
Scientology
Landmark worldwide
The topics proposed for a rewording of what is covered under DS are:
India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan
Armenia/Azerbaijan
Additionally any Article probation topics not already revoked are proposed for revocation.
The user group oversight will be renamed suppress in around 3 weeks. This will not affect the name shown to users and is simply a change in the technical name of the user group. The change is being made for
technical reasons. You can comment
in Phabricator if you have objections.
The Reply Tool feature, which is a part of Discussion Tools, will be opt-out for everyone logged in or logged out starting 7 February 2022. Editors wishing to comment on this can do so in the relevant
Village Pump discussion.
A RfC is open to discuss prohibiting draftification of articles over 90 days old.
Technical news
The deployment of the reply tool as an opt-out feature, as announced in last month's newsletter, has been delayed to 7 March. Feedback and comments are being welcomed at
Wikipedia talk:Talk pages project. (
T296645)
Access to
Special:RevisionDelete has been expanded to include users who have the deletelogentry and deletedhistory rights. This means that those in the
Researcher user group and
Checkusers who are not administrators can now access
Special:RevisionDelete. The users able to view the special page after this change are the 3 users in the Researcher group, as there are currently no checkusers who are not already administrators. (
T301928)
When viewing deleted revisions or diffs on
Special:Undelete a back link to the undelete page for the associated page is now present. (
T284114)
Following an
RfC, a change has been made to the
administrators inactivity policy. Under the new policy, if an administrator has not made at least 100 edits over a period of 5 years they may be desysopped for inactivity.
A public status system for WMF wikis has been created. It is located at
https://www.wikimediastatus.net/ and is hosted separately to WMF wikis so in the case of an outage it will remain viewable.
Arbitration
Remedy 2 of the St Christopher case has been rescinded following a
motion. The remedy previously authorised administrators to place a ban on single-purpose accounts who were disruptively editing on the article
St Christopher Iba Mar Diop College of Medicine or related pages from those pages.
Administrators using the mobile web interface can now access
Special:Block directly from user pages. (
T307341)
The
IP Info feature has been
deployed to all wikis as a Beta Feature. Any autoconfirmed user may enable the feature using the "IP info" checkbox under Preferences →
Beta features. Autoconfirmed users will be able to access basic information about an IP address that includes the country and connection method. Those with advanced privileges (admin, bureaucrat, checkuser) will have access to extra information that includes the Internet Service Provider and more specific location.
The New Pages Patrol queue has around 10,000 articles to be reviewed. As all administrators have the patrol right, please consider helping out. The queue is
here. For further information on the state of the project, see the latest
NPP newsletter.
An RfC has been closed with consensus to add javascript that will show edit notices for editors editing via a mobile device. This only works for users using a mobile browser, so iOS app editors will still not be able to see edit notices.
An RfC has been closed with the consensus that train stations are not inherently notable.
Administrators will now see links on user pages for "Change block" and "Unblock user" instead of just "Block user" if the user is already blocked. (
T308570)
Arbitration
The arbitration case request Geschichte has been automatically closed after a 3 month suspension of the case.
Miscellaneous
You can vote for candidates in the
2022 Board of Trustees elections from 16 August to 30 August. Two community elected seats are up for election.
Wikimania 2022 is taking place virtually from 11 August to 14 August. The schedule for wikimania is listed
here. There are also a number of
in-person events associated with Wikimania around the world.
Tech tip: When revision-deleting on desktop, hold ⇧ Shift between clicking two checkboxes to select every box in that range.
A discussion is open to define a process by which Vector 2022 can be made the default for all users.
An RfC is open to gain consensus on whether
Fox News is
reliable for science and politics.
Technical news
The impact report on the effects of disabling IP editing on the Persian (Farsi) Wikipedia has been released.
The WMF is looking into making a
Private Incident Reporting System (PIRS) system to improve the reporting of harmful incidents through easier and safer reporting. You can leave comments on the talk page by answering the
questions provided. Users who have faced harmful situations are also invited to join a PIRS interview to share the experience. To sign up
please emailMadalina Ana.
Arbitration
An arbitration case regarding
Conduct in deletion-related editing has been closed. The Arbitration Committee
passed a remedy as part of the final decision to create a request for comment (RfC) on how to handle mass nominations at Articles for Deletion (AfD).
The arbitration case request Jonathunder has been automatically closed after a 6 month suspension of the case.
Miscellaneous
The new pages patrol (NPP) team has prepared an appeal to the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) for assistance with addressing Page Curation bugs and requested features. You are encouraged to read the
open letter before it is sent, and if you support it, consider signing it. It is not a discussion, just a signature will suffice.
Following an RfC, consensus has been found that, in the context of politics and science, the reliability of
FoxNews.com is unclear and that additional considerations apply to its use.
The
Articles for creation helper script now automatically recognises administrator accounts which means your name does not need to be listed at
WP:AFCP to help out. If you wish to help out at AFC, enable AFCH by navigating to Preferences →
Gadgets and checking the "Yet Another AfC Helper Script" box.
Arbitration
Remedy 8.1 of the Muhammad images case will be rescinded 1 November following a
motion.
An
RfC is open to discuss having open
requests for adminship automatically placed on hold after the seven-day period has elapsed, pending closure or other action by a
bureaucrat.
Tech tip: Wikimarkup in a block summary is parsed in the notice that the blockee sees. You can use templates with custom options to specify situations like {{
rangeblock|create=yes}} or {{
uw-ublock|contains profanity}}.
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the
Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:35, 29 November 2022 (UTC)reply
An RfC on the banners for the December 2022 fundraising campaign has been closed.
Technical news
A new preference named "Enable limited width mode" has been added to the
Vector 2022 skin. The preference is also shown as a toggle on every page if your monitor is 1600 pixels or wider. When disabled it removes the whitespace added by Vector 2022 on the left and right of the page content. Disabling this preference has the same effect as enabling the
wide-vector-2022 gadget. (
T319449)
Arbitration
Eligible users are invited to
vote on candidates for the Arbitration Committee until 23:59 December 12, 2022 (UTC). Candidate statements can be seen
here.
The arbitration case Stephen has been opened and the proposed decision is expected 1 December 2022.
A
motion has modified the procedures for contacting an admin facing
Level 2 desysop.
Miscellaneous
Tech tip: A single IPv6 connection usually has access to a "subnet" of 18 quintillion IPs. Add /64 to the end of an IP in
Special:Contributions to see all of a subnet's edits, and
consider blocking the whole subnet rather than an IP that may change within a minute.
Hi, This is notification of my appeal.
[1] You were the enforcing admin. FYI we briefly discussed it over a year ago.
[2] Regards, --
Yae4 (
talk) 12:07, 2 December 2022 (UTC)reply
The Arbitration Committee has concluded the
2021-22 review of the contentious topics system (formerly known as
discretionary sanctions), and its final decision is viewable at the
revision process page. As part of the review process, the Arbitration Committee has resolved by
motion that:
The above proposals that are supported by an absolute majority of unrecused active arbitrators are hereby enacted. The drafting arbitrators (CaptainEek, L235, and Wugapodes) are directed to take the actions necessary to bring the proposals enacted by this motion into effect, including by amending the procedures at
WP:AC/P and
WP:AC/DS. The authority granted to the drafting arbitrators by this motion expires one month after enactment.
The Arbitration Committee thanks all those who have participated in the
2021-22 discretionary sanctions review process and all who have helped bring it to a successful conclusion. This motion concludes the 2021-22 discretionary sanctions review process.
This motion initiates a one-month implementation period for the updates to the contentious topics system. The Arbitration Committee will announce when the
initial implementation of the Committee's decision has concluded and the amendments made by the drafting arbitrators in accordance with the Committee's decision take effect. Any editors interested in the implementation process are invited to assist at
the implementation talk page, and editors interested in updates may subscribe to the
update list.
A 1RR DS for
Hunter Biden laptop controversy isn't really working. We've got roughly the same number of editors on opposite sides of an argument, merely reverting each other. Editor-A adds something; Editor-B reverts it; Editor-C re-adds it; Editor-D reverts it; etc etc. A 1-month protection for the page, would've been best.
GoodDay (
talk) 22:36, 19 December 2022 (UTC)reply
I doubt 24-hrs will do. If not 1-month, then why not 2-weeks.
GoodDay (
talk) 22:57, 19 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Thanks for stepping in. I was thinking something a bit longer term than a day, as the dispute immediately reignited after the last protection expired. I think more along the lines of three days or a week.
ScottishFinnishRadish (
talk) 22:54, 19 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Sorry, I tried to reply yesterday but my edit got lost in an edit conflict and I was on mobile in the car so I gave up.
A month of full protection on an unstable article with this much traffic isn't an option in my book. I still think the best option would be for you to follow the advice I left on TFD's talk page: to work with your opponents to find a compromise. That would make protection unnecessary. ~
Awilley (
talk) 15:39, 20 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Hello Awilley. If an editor pinged editors to a talkpage discussion (editor's who've already chimed in on that talkpage, in recent days on same topic), to ask them if they'll support that editor's edit to the page. Would that be considered
canvassing? --
GoodDay (
talk) 03:13, 20 December 2022 (UTC)reply
PS: When the page protection expires. You'll know (via page history) which editor or editors, will soon re-add the dispute tag.
GoodDay (
talk) 19:12, 20 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Requested move at the church main article
I'd like to say I'm surprised, but I'm not. I knew that as soon as the recent rfc regarding capitalization ended in favor of lower case "the", the name of the article itself would be challenged based on that result (despite the arguments in the rfc that the two were completely separate and distinct situations that had nothing to do with each other). Anyways, just wanted to make sure someone else was aware as I'm likely to be out of communications for a couple of days due to an unexpected medical situation. --
FyzixFighter (
talk) 02:27, 20 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Voting for the
Sound Logo has closed and the winner is expected to be announced February to April 2023.
Tech tip: You can view information about IP addresses in a centralised location using
bullseye which won the Newcomer award in the recent
Coolest Tool Awards.
Suggestions and concerns may be directed to the arbitration clerk team at
WT:AC/C.
The drafting arbitrators warmly thank all those who have worked to implement the new procedure during this implementation period and beyond. KevinL (aka
L235·t·c) 19:44, 17 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Hello Awilley. Here's something odd: The talk page template for the 24-hour BRD restriction has been changed to a new version that IMO is not as clear and easily observed for most users.
I'm pretty sure I don't need to tell you why, but for anyone else who reads this, the former version was worded in terms of each editor's own actions, which are known and controlled by them. It said more or less, if your edit is reverted do this and this. The new version says "observe BRD" -- which takes the user link-hopping eventually to a page that says BRD is optional and ties to the CONSENSUS page, which is very broad and does not give the kind of brief instrumental instruction that the former 24-BRD template presented. The former template simply told editors what to do in order to comply. The new one is a head scratcher, especially since any infractions may be (sometimes unintentionally) from less experienced editors.
I have no idea how templates work, who edits them etc. and I was hoping that with your Admin and software chops you might agree with me and propose to the appropriate person that we return to the former wording for this very effective page restriction.
SPECIFICOtalk 15:32, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The template was probably changed to match the new wording proposed by Arbcom. I'll have a look and see what if anything can be done. ~
Awilley (
talk) 16:31, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Thanks. I don't recall any discussion of this revision during the review process. This restriction works very well on the most contentious pages, Trump among others. It would be a real loss if it were not well understood or less widely applied vs. the more onerous and less effective restrictions.
SPECIFICOtalk 16:44, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Voting in the
2023 Community Wishlist Survey will begin on 10 February 2023 and end on 24 February 2023. You can submit, discuss and revise proposals until 6 February 2023.
Tech tip:
Syntax highlighting is available in both the 2011 and 2017 Wikitext editors. It can help make editing paragraphs with many references or complicated templates easier.
Following a
request for comment, the Portal CSD criteria (
P1 (portal subject to CSD as an article) and
P2 (underpopulated portal)) have been deprecated.
The
Terms of Use update cycle has started, which
includes a [p]roposal for better addressing undisclosed paid editing. Feedback is being accepted until 24 April 2023.
Baháʼu'lláh has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the
reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article.
Unpicked6291 (
talk) 21:07, 7 March 2023 (UTC)reply
The
rollback of Vector 2022 RfC has found no consensus to rollback to Vector legacy, but has found rough consensus to disable "limited width" mode by default.
A
request for comment about removing administrative privileges in specified situations is open for feedback.
Technical news
Progress has started on the
Page Triage improvement project. This is to address the concerns raised by the community in their
2022 WMF letter that requested improvements be made to the tool.
Following
an RfC, editors indefinitely site-banned by
community consensus will now have all rights, including sysop, removed.
As a part of the Wikimedia Foundation's
IP Masking project, a
new policy has been created that governs the access to temporary account IP addresses. An
associated FAQ has been created and individual communities can increase the requirements to view temporary account IP addresses.
Technical news
Bot operators and tool maintainers should schedule time in the coming months to test and update their tools for the effects of
IP masking. IP masking will not be deployed to any content wiki until at least October 2023 and is unlikely to be deployed to the English Wikipedia until some time in 2024.
Arbitration
The arbitration case World War II and the history of Jews in Poland has been closed. The topic area of Polish history during World War II (1933-1945) and the history of Jews in Poland is subject to a "reliable source consensus-required" contentious topic restriction.
Following
an RfC,
TFAs will be automatically semi-protected the day before it is on the main page and through the day after.
A discussion at
WP:VPP about revision deletion and oversight for
dead names found that [s]ysops can choose to use revdel if, in their view, it's the right tool for this situation, and they need not default to oversight. But oversight could well be right where there's a particularly high risk to the person. Use your judgment.
The SmallCat dispute case has closed. As part of the final decision, editors participating in
XfD have been reminded to be careful about forming local consensus which may or may not reflect the broader community consensus. Regular closers of
XfD forums were also encouraged to note when broader community discussion, or changes to policies and guidelines, would be helpful.
Miscellaneous
Tech tip: The "Browse history interactively" banner shown at the top of
Special:Diff can be used to easily look through a history, assemble composite diffs, or find out what archive something wound up in.
Following
a motion, the contentious topic designation of Prem Rawat has been struck. Actions previously taken using this contentious topic designation are still in force.
Following
several motions, multiple topic areas are no longer designated as a contentious topic. These contentious topic designations were from the Editor conduct in e-cigs articles, Liancourt Rocks, Longevity, Medicine, September 11 conspiracy theories, and Shakespeare authorship question cases.
Following
a motion, remedies 3.1 (All related articles under 1RR whenever the dispute over naming is concerned), 6 (Stalemate resolution) and 30 (Administrative supervision) of the Macedonia 2 case have been rescinded.
Following
a motion, remedy 6 (One-revert rule) of the The Troubles case has been amended.
An arbitration case named Industrial agriculture has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case close 8 November.
Miscellaneous
The
Articles for Creation backlog drive is happening in November 2023, with 700+ drafts pending reviews for in the last 4 months or so. In addition to the AfC participants, all administrators and New Page Patrollers can conduct reviews using the helper script, Yet Another AFC Helper Script, which can be enabled in
the Gadgets settings.
Sign up here to participate!
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the
Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:30, 28 November 2023 (UTC)reply
Following a
talk page discussion, the
Administrators' accountability policy has been updated to note that while it is considered best practice for administrators to have
notifications (pings) enabled, this is not mandatory. Administrators who do not use notifications are now strongly encouraged to indicate this on their user page.
Arbitration
Following
a motion, the
Extended Confirmed Restriction has been amended, removing the allowance for non-extended-confirmed editors to post constructive comments on the "Talk:" namespace. Now, non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace solely to make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided that their actions are not disruptive.
The Arbitration Committee has
announced a call for Checkusers and Oversighters, stating that it will currently be accepting applications for CheckUser and/or Oversight permissions at any point in the year.
A few of us have been writing an essay:
Wikipedia:Crime_labels. I ran across your similar posting on BLP Talk "Applying controversial labels to people" so thought you'd be interested. I am overwhelmed by the vast expense/waste of time and effort debating/squabbling the same issue across large numbers of BLPs! Cheers,
Bdushaw (
talk) 14:28, 9 December 2023 (UTC)reply
Following a
motion, the Arbitration Committee rescinded the restrictions on the page name move discussions for the two Ireland pages that were
enacted in June 2009.
An
RfC about increasing the inactivity requirement for Interface administrators is open for feedback.
Technical news
Pages that use the JSON contentmodel will now use tabs instead of spaces for auto-indentation. This will significantly reduce the page size. (
T326065)
Arbitration
Following a
motion, the Arbitration Committee adopted a new enforcement restriction on January 4, 2024, wherein the Committee may apply the 'Reliable source consensus-required restriction' to specified topic areas.
Community feedback is
requested for a draft to replace the "Information for administrators processing requests" section at
WP:AE.
A vote to ratify the charter for the
Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is open till 2 February 2024, 23:59:59 (UTC) via
Secure Poll. All eligible voters within the Wikimedia community have the opportunity to either support or oppose the adoption of the U4C Charter and share their reasons. The details of the voting process and voter eligibility can be found
here.
Community Tech has made some preliminary decisions about the future of the
Community Wishlist Survey. In summary, they aim to develop a new, continuous intake system for community technical requests that improves prioritization, resource allocation, and communication regarding wishes.
Read more
I have been trying to get other members of the LDS WikiProject to understand the issue with varying degrees of success. I'm glad you get it from your edit summary and edits on 2 Nephi. Is there some way you can help explain this to the others? The Book of Mormon pages are filled with this kind of mystifying prose, and I cannot tell if it is all anachronism or if it gloss that has been added by Mormon oral culture through their Sunday School classes. Any thoughts you might have on how to get, let's be honest here, cultural Mormons to understand that this kind of description does not work outside of the Mormon culture would be most appreciated.
jps (
talk) 11:38, 17 March 2024 (UTC)reply
It is a problem, and it's one that is hard to see when you're "in" it. There is a whole slew of "Mormon lingo" -- terms Mormons use that are confusing to outsiders, words that mean different things inside Mormonism than outside. I don't know the exact reason for it, and I suspect it has something to do with basically having your own state for a century. But I've also seen these kinds of things in many different groups, cultures, religions, and even political parties. I'm certain an English speaking alien visiting the United States for the first time would be confused by our use of the words "pro-life" and "pro-choice". And I occasionally read news articles mentioning "dog-whistles" used by politicians that sound innocuous to casual observers but have specific meanings to people in their base.
I'm not sure how to best solve the problem. It takes a conscious effort. I suppose the first step is to recognize that there is a problem. An expansion of
MOS:LDSJARGON might be helpful. Off the top of my head I can think of a bunch of words that have a completely different meaning inside Mormonism than outside. For example:
Trinity = A really bad false doctrine made up by the Catholic Church
Heavenly Father = God the Father. (The TV series Under the Banner of Heaven overused that one, in my opinion. Where most Mormons would have just said "God", they made sure to say "Heavenly Father" each time.)
Christ = Jesus (this one's not unique to Mormonism obviously, but it's not great form on Wikipedia to swap the title for the name)
Celestial Kingdom = Heaven
Spirit Prison = Hell but more like Purgatory
Outer Darkness = Actual Hell
Telestial Kingdom = Something between heaven and hell
Gentiles = non-Mormons (sometimes including Jews 🤦)
The Church (capitalized) = LDS Church (no, I'm not going to take the time to write it all out)
Gospel = kinda hard to define. Basically the whole message about Jesus saving everybody.
I remember once being in a meeting where a word was being re-defined in real time. There's a well-known
document from the church presidency stating that husbands/fathers are to "preside over their families". But there's also a principle that husbands and wives are supposed to be "equal partners". There were some interesting mental gymnastics involved in trying to redefine the word "preside" as meaning "not being in charge".
Anyway, I'm not trying to bash or mock LDS, but I am being more provocative than necessary, because I do want people to recognize that it's a problem. ~
Awilley (
talk) 17:29, 17 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Thanks! Christ = Jesus to Mormons, but is that always how they interpret it in the Book of Mormon? If so, extremely confusing for an outsider. Same with "Messiah". Of course, they're listed on the anachronisms page for good reason. I am surprised that you are worried that this list will be seen as bashing or mocking.
jps (
talk) 18:15, 17 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Sorry, no, that's not what I was saying. "Christ" didn't really belong in this list, but I mentioned it because I had switched a "Christ" to "Jesus" in my edit yesterday. Jesus has hundreds of titles (Christ, Jesus Christ, Messiah, Savior, Lamb of God, Son of God, The Lord, Jehovah,...) and they're all pretty much interchangeable to Mormons. My point was that for the purposes of writing on Wikipedia we should just be writing "Jesus" and not swapping that out with any titles. Calling him "Christ" (translated "anointed one") or "Messiah" (also "anointed") is POV as well as confusing to outsiders. ~
Awilley (
talk) 21:32, 17 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The other one to deal with is "Atonement" which is pretty difficult to follow as a concept when it is being described in early books as something that the characters in the BoM are anticipating. As you may know, that doctrine essentially exists only in Christianity and took centuries to come into being within Early Christianity only to be recast/repurposed again and again amidst heresies and reformations and counterreformations right up to is usage within low church Protestant Christianity out of which the vast majority of the "Christian" parts of Mormons gets its theology. Just using that word unadorned in a narrative, for example, is jarring. We either need to discuss it or find a way to put it that isn't so much like an
oopart.
jps (
talk) 21:41, 17 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Right. That is a confusing one. How do you concisely define Atonement for a global audience, and how did people in 600 B.C. know it? The Book of Mormon answer is that an angel told Nephi in a vision that Jesus was going to be born in Jerusalem and then die to save everybody, so Nephi taught his followers to anticipate that. But I don't know how or whether to explain that in Wikipedia terms. I haven't done much editing on Book of Mormon topics. My focus has been more historical...Joseph Smith, Mormon belief and culture, etc. Just replied to you on AN/I btw. I think you misread the IP's edit. Rachel was reverting a Mormon pushing a Mormon POV. (Note how the IP references "The Church" in caps.) ~
Awilley (
talk) 22:02, 17 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Replied there. It was a compound edit, unfortunately, so I think the critique still stands.
Anyhoo... back to more pleasant topics: the thing that is troubling with describing the Book of Mormon is that Joseph Smith (et al.) was pretty fast and loose with their "translating"... which seems to be a common apologetic rejoinder when it comes to anachronisms. Problem is: Wikipedia is supposed to be intelligible so I think we have to either (a) identify the anachronisms in the discussion or (b) figure out a way to use words that are broad enough to not cause confusion. Sure, "church" could mean "religious gathering" more broadly, but Nephites, I gather, are thought by most Mormons to have attended something similar to their own church services. As Hydrangeans pointed out, the concern over this feels like it is falling into apologetics, which it is. But it is also falling into the problem of specificity. The proper solution is probably to excise discussion that would get bogged down in these sorts of things in favor of clear high-level summary style.
By the way, in researching all this, I found:
[3] Don't know how much you like irreverant Mormon flowcharts, but I really enjoyed it.
Ha! I'm reading Harry Potter to my kids right now, so I appreciate the house references. On the diff discussion, it was the "were you a fence sitter" part that Joseph Smith did not come up with but later leaders did.
Speaking of racism, that's a topic I struggle with when writing about Americans in the 1800s. I don't want to excuse it, but at the same time, literally everybody was racist back then by today's standards. So when I think about Mormonism, they're hardly unique in having racist policies from 1840 through the mid-1900s. What made the LDS Church unique is they held onto their racist policy all the way until 1978 and it took them until 2013 to apologize for it. I guess that's one downside of being a gerontocracy. I mean it's great to carry on some traditions, but others need to die. Don't get me wrong, I have a lot of respect for octogenarians...the accumulated experience and achievement and common sense...but on the flip side they are also pretty much set in their ways and resistant to change. (
coughcough)
On how to treat anachronisms a) vs. b) I really don't know, and suspect it's best on a case-by-case basis. My personal preference is probably b). Find a way to make it intelligible to outsiders but still recognizable to believers.
My Wiki-time is over for today, so I probably won't be able to respond too much more. ~
Awilley (
talk) 22:59, 17 March 2024 (UTC)reply
There is pretty strong evidence that this traces to Smith. I put it in the response.
As far as racism goes, there is no excuse. It's just fact. The honest thing to do is admit it and be clear that basically the mucky-mucks were all inveterate racists. Same thing with the Founding Fathers of the US. And the fact that other white men were ridiculously racist is sidestepping the point. After all, weren't Founding Fathers and Mormons supposed to be better than everyone else according to their own doctrines?
Anyway, good to be honest about the past and not try to hide it. I see that on the LDS pages about their own racism. They need to do better. Maybe they will someday.
Glad you liked the flowchart in spite of its irreverance.
The Toolforge Grid Engine services have been shut down after the final migration process from Grid Engine to Kubernetes. (
T313405)
Arbitration
An
arbitration case has been opened to look into "the intersection of managing conflict of interest editing with the harassment (outing) policy".
Miscellaneous
Editors are invited to sign up for
The Core Contest, an initiative running from April 15 to May 31, which aims to improve
vital and other core articles on Wikipedia.