Talk:The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the Kingdom of God

Naylor deceased

The only reference I can find about Naylor being deceased is the one that was supplied when this page was created. This reference is very vague and very dubious. It is a Wikipedia type of website where anyone can make updates to the information. However, unlike Wikipedia there are no sources required. So this reference is basically just the word of "Alan Unsworth", the editor who made the change on that website 10 months ago. This is no different then if this Alen put unsource information directly on Wikipedia. I don't believe this is a very valid citation.

However, to be clear, I would not be surprised if he was dead. Since these groups are very secretive it can be hard to get good citations. However something better then "Deceased, date unknown.” is needed. So unless someone comes up with something soon the statement "Naylor is now deceased" needs to be removed.

Additionally if Naylor is deceased, who is the current leader? If the persons name is known then List of Mormon fundamentalist leaders need to be updated with the new leader.--ARTEST4ECHO ^talk 14:40, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

I agree. The only other reference to Naylor's death that I could find was the comments section of this blog, which is of course very unreliable. There was a National Geographic documentary called Inside Polygamy: Life in Bountiful in which Ivan Nielson was referred to as "one of the leaders" of this church, but not as the overall leader. This Tribune article refers to Nielsen as leader, which is perhaps more reliable but the focus is on Winston Blackmore and this does not actually confirm Naylor's death. As you say citations are hard to get. Perhaps we shall delete the sentence until we know more information. Angrybeerman (talk) 17:18, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately I think it may be necessary. I really hate removing important information that may very well be right, but you can’t cite. I can’t find a way of knowing if he is dead or not. However, I would hate to remove it and be wrong. His death, as a founding leader, would be an important thing to mention, and his replacement name would also be important. However, everywhere I look, I only find his name as leader and no one else. Even if I could find a name , that would at least indicate that someone took over for him, so he is probably dead, but I can’t find anything--ARTEST4ECHO ^talk 18:47, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

I had one last idea. Before we take it off, I'm going to ask user:Good Olfactory. He seems to have done a lot of research on the various LDS sects and is very knowable on this subject. He may know of someplace to find this out. If not I think it needs to be removed. --ARTEST4ECHO ^talk 18:57, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, I've already deleted the sentence. Good idea though. If that doesn't work out we'll leave it for now. I also just realised I'd spelt Nielsen wrong throughout the article! I've corrected that mistake. Angrybeerman (talk) 19:03, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

You didn’t need to take it off on my account. I’m still looking. However, user:Good Olfactory has a note that he wont be on much in June. I will post a message for him I agree that "Ivan Nielsen" seems to be the person who is now leader. The circumstantial evidence points to it. I’m doing a search of his name right now. The words "one of the leaders of..." and "His small group" pops up alot. I am going to keep looking in hope to find something definitive.--ARTEST4ECHO ^talk 19:12, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

I deleted it because I agreed with you when you said that there weren't enough reliable sources. I hope you find one now though so we can establish who the new leader is, if there is one. Good luck. Angrybeerman (talk) 19:21, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

I wont give up for a while. Hopefully I'll find something. The more I find the more I agree that "Ivan Nielsen" has taken over. I just can't prove it yet.--ARTEST4ECHO ^talk 19:43, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I got the message about this issue—I'm sorry that I can't help. This is one group that I don't know very much about, so I'm not aware of any good citations about this. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 05:52, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately after much looking I have been able to find anything that Angrybeerman hasn't already mentioned. I guess we will have to leave it off for the time being.--ARTEST4ECHO ^talk 17:09, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Requested move

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: move the page at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 00:11, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

---

Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the Kingdom of God → The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the Kingdom of God – I know this is going to open a can of worms, but after looking up the Business entry (see "Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the Kingdom of God, The". utah.gov. Utah Division of Corporations and commercial Code: Business Seach. Retrieved 18 November 2014.) in order to cite the name, I notice that this sect using the same naming structure as The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. This means that the "The" is part of it's official name, just like the LDS Church, so Per WP:The, MOS:LDS, WP:NCLDS and Talk:The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the name of this page should be The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the Kingdom of God, with the "The". Not all Latter Day Saint sects do this, but this one appear to, especially since it also used the same hyphen and lower case "d" in "Latter-day Saints", which is unique to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. - ARTEST4ECHO ^(talk) 21:54, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose – adding "The" does not in any way improve the title relative to the WP:CRITERIA. Dicklyon (talk) 05:27, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
• Support as per WP:UCRN and per WP:Criteria consistency and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and other items in Category:The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Adding "The" improves the title. We are not talking about "A Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the Kingdom of God". They may have a belief without evidence but they have a very specific belief without evidence. Gregkaye ✍♪ 12:22, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
• Support consistency, regardless of whether it's a consistent use of a leading "The" or a consistent absence of it. Official names and registrations are beside the point, and original research relating to hyphens (huh?) means nothing at all, but it cannot be the case that initial "The" is required for some LDS sects and prohibited for others that use the same basic name. 209.211.131.181 (talk) 13:54, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
• Comment - Not all LDS sects use "The" as part of their official names, for example: Community of Christ, Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Strangites), Remnant Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, etc. However, this one does, just like The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and The Church of Jesus Christ (Bickertonite), etc. If it is part of the "Offical name", just like the LDS Church and other, it should include the "The", just like those.

Dicklyon argument against using the is the same argument used by those who seem to hate the idea of every added the "The". This argument has been rejected over and over again (for example: Talk:The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints:Requested move). "The" does infact improve the title relative to the WP:CRITERIA, as it is part of the "Official name" of the sect. Therefore it should include for the same reason as The Hershey Company, The New York Times Company, The Beatles, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, etc. All this is per WP:The and has been argued over and over again, and in the end, the final consensus has always been that the "The" should be included as it is part of the "Official name", and should be included because:

1. The official name of the church includes the capitalized "The"
2. The inclusion of the capitalized "The" as part of the church's name has theological significance to the church's adherents: For an explanation see this article
3. A special Manual of Style was been developed to address this issues and it has alway included the "The" in the name when appropriate.

The only reason I brought that up the hyphen and lower case "d" is that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, with the exception of this sect, is the only sect I have found that uses both the hyphen and lower case "d". This makes it unique among Latter Day Saint Sects. Since this sect seems to be used the same hyphen and lower case "d" as the LDS Church, it supports the idea that this sect is also using the same spelling and structuring as The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which includes the "The" in the name. That is the reason I mentioned it.--- ARTEST4ECHO ^(talk) 14:35, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

"Official names" matter less than common names and title consistency. In any case, I'm not sure where you're going with the hyphen thing - you say that the mainline Church of Latter Day Saints "is unique" in its use of the hyphen, then note correctly that this sect also uses the same hyphen. Even if that were a coherent argument (which it can't be), it wouldn't mean anything about the unrelated word "The". As I said, I don't care either way about various Latter Day Saint churches starting with "The" or not, I only care about title consistency, one way or the other. 209.211.131.181 (talk) 15:10, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

I'm noting that this sect is copying the same structure as the LDS Church, i.e. using the "The", the hyphen and the lower case "d". So we should treat it the same as we do the LDS Church.--- ARTEST4ECHO ^(talk) 16:27, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

• Support. Since the group is consciously echoing or imitating the name of the LDS Church, including it here makes sense as long as the "The" is included as part of the name for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 04:35, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the Kingdom of God. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20141129034510/https://secure.utah.gov/bes/action/details?entity=4726446-0140 to https://secure.utah.gov/bes/action/details?entity=4726446-0140

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 11:35, 25 February 2016 (UTC)