Talk:Temple garment

1. REDIRECT Template:Archives

Members not instructed to wear garments day and night

In the article, it states that members are told in their recommend interview to wear the garments day and night. However, with the new questions, that is no longer the case.

Here is the source, it is on the last page in the grayed out box. I'm not sure how to change the article and add that as a source, so I was hoping someone else could correct this error. Thanks!

Highly Inappropriate Content

Good day, I'm just writing to inform the moderators of this article that it contains highly inappropriate content, displaying a picture of the actual clothing that members of the faith consider sacred and not to be displayed for viewing by those who have not also taken on the promises that need to be made to be worthy to wear the clothing. This is not the type of behavior that should be tolerated in an objective and respectful source of information. 67.2.31.58 (talk) 01:09, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

The photos of which you speak are acceptable for inclusion, per Wikipedia policies and were provided courtesy of the Church, so they meet the threshold for inclusion. --Jgstokes (talk) 23:30, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

According to the info on wikimedia commons this photo was NOT provided "courtesy of the Church" but rather has a dubious copyright authorization: "The use of this photo was granted to me by the owner of the copyright, a Mr. Packham on 11/11/06." We are unable to verify this copyright because there is no first name of the purported copyright owner. If anyone has evidence that this was provided by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, please provide the same. Othewise, we agree with the previous talker and believe this content should be removed. Hot Dog (talk) 14:03, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

That would be the late Richard Packham (he died last April at 90.) "Provided courtesy of the Church" doesn't make much sense; the original photo comes from Packham's website. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 00:19, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Richard Packham is not a "neutral" source of information, it is obvious from his web page that his goal was to attack and defame the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and its adherents. This content was highly innapropriate, is not in good taste, and is offensive to a large audience: the members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The photos have been removed for those reasons. Hot Dog (talk) 04:22, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

So what if he's not neutral? The absolute only issue here is, "is the image properly licensed". Wikipedia is not censored. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 04:40, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

That's not the only issue here, the photo is not in good taste and is offensive to a large audience. The photo does not display a "neutral point of view" but rather is part of an effort to demean or embarrass the adherents of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. It violates the NPOV standard: "All encyclopedic content on Wikipedia must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), which means representing fairly, proportionately, and...without editorial bias, all the significant views..." I am removing the photo again. Please do not revers my edit. Thank you. Hot Dog (talk) 16:50, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

You're welcome. There is no violation of WP:NPOV. We have pictures all over Wikipedia that are offensive to some audience. We have pictures of Mohammad. We have pictures of Baháʼu'lláh. Adherents of the relevant religions don't want those pictures up. We also have pictures of penises and vaginas and all sorts of different sex acts. Wikipedia is not WP:CENSORED: Template:Tq --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 17:06, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia guidelines aside, the Church does not unconditionally prohibit display of the garments. Per the Church Handbook: Template:Tq This article explains the significance, thereby making the picture within Church policy. Additionally, the Church itself shares similar pictures with the news media. Just with a quick search, CBS, Salt Lake Tribune, and The Week all display pictures with Church permission. PortlandSaint (talk) 16:01, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

Redirect nominated for deletion

I have nominated the ‘Magical Underwear’ redirect for deletion. This redirect is inappropriate and offensive, often confusing people. The term ‘magical underwear’ is frequently used as an insult. LuxembourgLover (talk) 18:29, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

The RfD can be found at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2024_July_18#Magical_underwear Jruderman (talk) 23:13, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Citation style standardization

I propose to standardize this article's citation template style per WP:CITESTYLE which says "citations within any given article should follow a consistent style". For example, I've recently done so on Blood atonement, Mormonism and violence, Joseph Smith Papyri, and Criticism of the LDS Church. Are there any opposed to me making the citation style uniform to inline "cite x" and "ref name" for this article? If anyone is opposed, are they willing to volunteer to do the standardizing labor to make it all "harvnb" style? I'm only willing to take the time to standardize it all to the "cite x" form I'm more familiar and comfortable with. In my opinion, arguing to just leave it at the status quo with the mixed styles, without offering to correct it isn't constructive, and a bit like status quo stonewalling. If I don't receive any opposing volunteers who will standardize it all to "harvnb" within a week or so I'll go ahead and standardize it all to "cite x"/"ref name". Pastelitodepapa (talk) 02:52, 4 June 2025 (UTC)