View source for Talk:Book of Mormon

{{Skip to talk}}
{{Talk header|noarchive=yes|search=no}}
{{controversial}}
{{Not a forum|personal beliefs, nor for [[Apologetics]]/[[Polemic]]s||the Book of Mormon}}
{{article history
|action1=RBP
|action1date=January 19,  2004
|action1link=Wikipedia:Archive/Refreshing brilliant prose - History and religion
|action1result=demoted
|action1oldid=2284269

|action2=GAN
|action2date=17 October 2007
|action2link=
|action2result=not listed
|action2oldid=165296664

|currentstatus=FFAC
|otddate=2011-03-26
|otdoldid=420716925
|otd2date=2014-03-26
|otd2oldid=601323104
|otd3date=2016-03-26
|otd3oldid=711841810
}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|collapsed=yes|class=B|vital=yes|1=
{{WikiProject Religious texts|importance=High}}
{{WikiProject Religion|importance=High}}
{{WikiProject Books}}
{{WikiProject Christianity|importance=High}}
{{WikiProject Latter Day Saint movement|importance=Top}}
{{WikiProject Literature|importance=High}}
{{WikiProject United States|importance=High}}
{{WikiProject Anthropology|importance=High|oral-tradition=yes}}
}}
{{merged-from|Neum (Book of Mormon)|26 December 2023}}
{{blarn|River Sidon|2024-04-16}}

{{Archive box
| auto = yes
| search = yes
| search-width = 40
| search-break = yes
| collapsible = yes
| collapsed = no
| bot = MiszaBot    
| units = days
| age = 90
| index = /Archive index
}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
| archive = Talk:Book of Mormon/Archive %(counter)d
| algo = old(90d)
| counter = 15
| maxarchivesize = 100K
| minthreadsleft = 2
| minthreadstoarchive = 1
| archiveheader = {{Talkarchivenav}}
}}
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn
|target=Talk:Book of Mormon/Archive index
|mask=Talk:Book of Mormon/Archive <#>
|leading_zeros=0
|indexhere=yes}}
{{Connected contributor (paid)
| checked = March 7, 2024. The paid contributions follow [[WP:NPOV]] and have no direct [[WP:COI]]
| User1  = Rae (BYU) | U1-employer  = BYU    | U1-client  =      | U1-EH  = yes | U1-banned  =     | U1-otherlinks  = 
}}
__FORCETOC__

== Book of mormon evidence  ==

This article implies lack of evidence for the book of mormon which is incredibly incorrect. There is more evidence for the Book of Mormon then there is for evolution.
Please see resources and correct issue.
https://bookofmormonevidence.org/ [[User:BoZ1020|BoZ1020]] ([[User talk:BoZ1020|talk]]) 05:31, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

:Wikipedia's [[WP:NPOV|policy is to represent a point of view that is as neutral as possible]]. Part of this means Wikipedia [[WP:VOICE|avoids stating as facts claims that are extremely contested]]. The belief that there is a lot of strong evidence for the Book of Mormon having ancient historical origins is very contested. As an idea, it's primarily believed in by Latter-day Saints and some other denominations in the Latter Day Saint movement; in total, they represent a few million people in the world, out of many billions. More pertinently for Wikipedia, it's an idea that is not asserted by the balance of [[WP:RS|reliable sources]]. Wikipedia's policy on having a neutral point of view directs us to focus on what is reported and analyzed and expressed in reliable sources. Rather than try to have Wikipedia express our own personal conclusions about the world or community-specific points of view about the world (such as a specific religion's beliefs), we aim to summarize what scientists, historians, journalists, and other professional researchers say about the world.
:Wikipedia guidelines and community consensus generally agree that reliable sources are primarily academic sources, such as peer-reviewed journals and university press-published books. The website you linked would not be considered a reliable source on Wikipedia. It's not affiliated with mainstream journalism or with an academic publisher like a university press. It's run by people who are connected to the [https://religiondispatches.org/mormon-group-digging-for-scriptural-city-of-zarahemla-in-iowa-is-a-portrait-of-religious-nationalism/ "Heartland model", a movement among some Latter-day Saints that is associated not with balanced scholarship but with religiously flavored U.&nbsp;S. nationalism and anti-immigrant politics] (''[[Religion Dispatches]]'', 2021). [[User:Hydrangeans|Hydrangeans]] ([[She (pronoun)|she/her]] &#124; [[User talk:Hydrangeans#top|talk]] &#124; [[Special:Contributions/Hydrangeans|edits]]) 06:20, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
:: [[User:123Mike-n-ike|123Mike-n-ike]] ([[User talk:123Mike-n-ike|talk]]) 10:47, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
:: [[User:123Mike-n-ike|123Mike-n-ike]] ([[User talk:123Mike-n-ike|talk]]) 10:50, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

== Enough of this ==

It’s still incorrect to exclude “The” and “Another Testament of Jesus Christ” in the Book of Mormon  page title, the day Wikipedia commenced, ten years ago, today and forevermore.

(1) That’s its official, legal, published title, in over 90 languages, for crying out loud. The cover and title page of every new  physical copy and every official, legally authorized online edition is “The Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ”. And it’s been that way for almost 45 years.

But remarkably, whoever it is that has a problem with this - and so continues to revert all efforts to adjust this - doesn’t have any problem with mentioning the book’s full, much longer, short-term, extremely obsolete original title in the first sentence of the page narrative.

This misleadingly emphasizes the book’s past over its present, resulting in a biased first impression to millions of </u>new,  unique page visitors</u> every year.

I can only imagine the few extremely vigilant editors who revert every effort to correct this and polish the narrative to neutral and/or balanced verbiage have some unbalanced ax to grind with the book and/or its publisher, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. In no way should anyone pressing against balance/neutral treatment have authority to control this page.

(2) Exactly zero people on this planet refer to it as “Book of Mormon” in any written or verbal context whatsoever. This is just reality - where “the rubber hits the road” - regardless of any bias of any kind.

Ergo, this is what its page title should be, despite the very strange, murky, confusing master appeal maze used as an excuse to super discourage anyone from correcting this as a matter of indisputable common sense.

Which other of the hundreds of thousands (or millions) of Wikipedia pages for ''<u>any</u>'' published book alters its title at all, much less in this severe way?

Very remarkably, the only two others I know of are '''the Bible''' (weird page title “Bible”) and '''the Quran''' (same weird thing “Quran”).

How about that?

See what they’re doing there?

In the words of Happy Gilmore, “''See, I know what you’re doing, <u>and I don’t like it.</u>''”

Knock it off, please.

Thank you all for your attention.

Dpammm [[User:Dpammm|Dpammma]] ([[User talk:Dpammm|talk]]) 21:36, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

:Here at Wikipedia we use the [[WP:PRIMARYNAME|primary name]] of things to name their articles. If you look up "Book of Mormon" on the Internet you will see that practically all sources refer to the book as simply "Book of Mormon" rather than the name you mention (whose use is noted somewhere in the article), presumably simply because its shorter. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints refers to it [https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bofm?lang=eng on its own website] as just "Book of Mormon", and on the page I linked doesn't refer to it at all by the subtitle you mention.
:Also, I would be confident in saying the majority of users editing this page have no strong connection to the subject; we just want to write a good encyclopedia article, [[WP:AGF|so don't feel slighted if someone reverses your edits]]. Have a nice day! &ndash;[[User:The Sophocrat|The Sophocrat]] ([[User talk:The Sophocrat|talk]]) 06:30, 26 May 2025 (UTC)