Talk:Sunday School (LDS Church)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Sunday School (LDS Church) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Christianity: Latter Day Saints Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Latter Day Saints portal This article is supported by WikiProject Latter Day Saint movement (assessed as Mid-importance).

General Authorities whose names are not in bold[edit]

I understand why we place names of previous or current general authorities in bold, but what I don't understand is why some general authorities names are in bold, but others aren't. A careful consultation of the list of members of the Sunday School general presidency will yield at least 5 present or former general authorities whose names have not been placed in bold typeface. I would think we'd want this to be routine throughout the whole article. Any thoughts? --Jgstokes (talk) 08:55, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Good question, Jgstokes. Although I have only quickly glanced through the list regarding your question, I think it is likely because some/all of those you've noted were not general authorities when they were serving in this assignment. Names such as Russell M. Nelson, Joseph B. Wirthlin and Joe J. Christensen are immediate examples. They all became general authorities later. For them to be included in bold - or to identify they later served as general authorities - would probably be best to have some sort of footnote or other identifier/clarifying marker. ChristensenMJ (talk) 16:13, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I found it to be very bizarre. I can tell you that some who were general authorities at the time of their Sunday School service are not in bold, and some, like President Nelson, were in bold though he wasn't a general authority at the time of his service. There needs to be some consistency, I think. That's why I posted on this issue. I want to get a consensus opinion on it. --Jgstokes (talk) 06:09, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Which specific ones that are on this page are problematic right now? (Nelson's is not currently bolded, nor has it been.) Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 00:10, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I can tell you from research I've done about it that those listed as being general authorities during their time as members of the Sunday School general presidency includes all those who were in the 10th-18th Sunday School General Presidencies. All of these brethren should be in bold because they were general authorities at the time of their service in the Sunday School General Presidency. That they were general authorities at the time of their service is evident from the 2013 Deseret News Church Almanac. On pg. 168, it states, "From Oct. 6, 1979 to April 3, 2004, the General Presidency of the Sunday School was composed of members of the Seventy." Therefore, all those in the 10th-18th Sunday School Presidencies should be in bold. Thanks. --Jgstokes (talk) 00:10, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Jgstokes, it appears all of those presidencies are already shown in bold. ChristensenMJ (talk) 00:43, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's so weird, because they weren't originally appearing in bold. Looked through the history, but nothing changed. Whatever the problem was, it's been resolved. Thanks. --Jgstokes (talk) 05:22, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]